Contextual Policy Transfer in Reinforcement Learning Domains via Deep Mixtures-of-Experts
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In reinforcement learning, agents that consider the context, or current state, when selecting source policies for transfer have been shown to outperform context-free approaches. However, existing approaches suffer from limitations, including sensitivity to sparse or delayed rewards and estimation errors in value functions. One important insight is that explicit learned models of the source dynamics, when available, could benefit contextual transfer in such settings. In this paper, we assume a family of tasks with shared sub-goals but different dynamics, and availability of estimated dynamics and policies for source tasks. To deal with possible estimation errors in dynamics, we introduce a novel Bayesian mixture-of-experts for learning state-dependent beliefs over source task dynamics that match the target dynamics using state transitions collected from the target task. The mixture is easy to interpret, demonstrates robustness to estimation errors in dynamics, and is compatible with most learning algorithms. We incorporate it into standard policy reuse frameworks and demonstrate its effectiveness on benchmarks from OpenAI gym.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it