MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reinforcement Learning in Deep Structured Teams: Initial Results with Finite and Infinite Valued Features

2020· article· en· W3090693621 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2020 IEEE Conference on Control Technology and Applications (CCTA) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarkov chainConvergence (economics)Variable-order Markov modelLinear modelQuadratic equationLinear regressionOrthonormal basisReinforcement learningState (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider Markov chain and linear quadratic models for deep structured teams with discounted and time-average cost functions under two non-classical information structures, namely, deep state sharing and no sharing. In deep structured teams, agents are coupled in dynamics and cost functions through deep state, where deep state refers to a set of orthogonal linear regressions of the states. In this article, we consider a homogeneous linear regression for Markov chain models (i.e., empirical distribution of states) and a few orthonormal linear regressions for linear quadratic models (i.e., weighted average of states). Some planning algorithms are developed for the case when the model is known, and some reinforcement learning algorithms are proposed for the case when the model is not known completely. The convergence of two model-free (reinforcement learning) algorithms, one for Markov chain models and one for linear quadratic models, is established. The results are then applied to a smart grid.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it