MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Learning Domain Randomization Distributions for Training Robust Locomotion Policies

2020· article· en· W3132089310 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceContext (archaeology)Machine learningTask (project management)GeneralizationExtrapolationDomain (mathematical analysis)Interpolation (computer graphics)Range (aeronautics)MathematicsStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers the problem of learning behaviors in simulation without knowledge of the precise dynamical properties of the target robot platform(s). In this context, our learning goal is to mutually maximize task efficacy on each environment considered and generalization across the widest possible range of environmental conditions. The physical parameters of the simulator are modified by a component of our technique that learns the Domain Randomization (DR) that is appropriate at each learning epoch to maximally challenge the current behavior policy, without being overly challenging, which can hinder learning progress. This so-called sweet spot distribution is a selection of simulated domains with the following properties: 1) The trained policy should be successful in environments sampled from the domain randomization distribution; and 2) The DR distribution made as wide as possible, to increase variability in the environments. These properties aim to ensure the trajectories encountered in the target system are close to those observed during training, as existing methods in machine learning are better suited for interpolation than extrapolation. We show how adapting the DR distribution while training context-conditioned policies results in improvements on jump-start and asymptotic performance when transferring a learned policy to the target environment <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sup> .

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207