MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Memory-based Deep Reinforcement Learning for POMDPs

2021· article· en· W4200140111 on OpenAlexafffund
Lingheng Meng, Rob Gorbet, Dana Kulić

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCompute Canada
KeywordsReinforcement learningMarkov decision processComputer scienceObservableArtificial intelligencePartially observable Markov decision processNoise (video)RoboticsComponent (thermodynamics)Sensitivity (control systems)Feature (linguistics)Deep learningMarkov processMarkov chainMachine learningRobotMarkov model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A promising characteristic of Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) is its capability to learn optimal policy in an end-to-end manner without relying on feature engineering. However, most approaches assume a fully observable state space, i.e. fully observable Markov Decision Processes (MDPs). In real-world robotics, this assumption is unpractical, because of issues such as sensor sensitivity limitations and sensor noise, and the lack of knowledge about whether the observation design is complete or not. These scenarios lead to Partially Observable MDPs (POMDPs). In this paper, we propose Long-Short-Term-Memory-based Twin Delayed Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient (LSTM-TD3) by introducing a memory component to TD3, and compare its performance with other DRL algorithms in both MDPs and POMDPs. Our results demonstrate the significant advantages of the memory component in addressing POMDPs, including the ability to handle missing and noisy observation data.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.300
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations77
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2021 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)Same topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207