MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201820699 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2022.3215769

Continuous-Time Fitted Value Iteration for Robust Policies

2022· article· en· W3201820699 on OpenAlex
Michael Lutter, Boris Belousov, Shie Mannor, Dieter Fox, Animesh Garg, Jan Peters

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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBellman equationDiscretizationReinforcement learningLeverage (statistics)Optimal controlMathematical optimizationComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)Dynamic programmingMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solving the Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equation is important in many domains including control, robotics and economics. Especially for continuous control, solving this differential equation and its extension the Hamilton-Jacobi-Isaacs equation, is important as it yields the optimal policy that achieves the maximum reward on a give task. In the case of the Hamilton-Jacobi-Isaacs equation, which includes an adversary controlling the environment and minimizing the reward, the obtained policy is also robust to perturbations of the dynamics. In this paper we propose continuous fitted value iteration (cFVI) and robust fitted value iteration (rFVI). These algorithms leverage the non-linear control-affine dynamics and separable state and action reward of many continuous control problems to derive the optimal policy and optimal adversary in closed form. This analytic expression simplifies the differential equations and enables us to solve for the optimal value function using value iteration for continuous actions and states as well as the adversarial case. Notably, the resulting algorithms do not require discretization of states or actions. We apply the resulting algorithms to the Furuta pendulum and cartpole. We show that both algorithms obtain the optimal policy. The robustness Sim2Real experiments on the physical systems show that the policies successfully achieve the task in the real-world. When changing the masses of the pendulum, we observe that robust value iteration is more robust compared to deep reinforcement learning algorithm and the non-robust version of the algorithm. Videos of the experiments are shown at https://sites.google.com/view/rfvi.

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 score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.239 · 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