Sample-Efficient Iterative Lower Bound Optimization of Deep Reactive Policies for Planning in Continuous MDPs
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
Recent advances in deep learning have enabled optimization of deep reactive policies (DRPs) for continuous MDP planning by encoding a parametric policy as a deep neural network and exploiting automatic differentiation in an end-to-end model-based gradient descent framework. This approach has proven effective for optimizing DRPs in nonlinear continuous MDPs, but it requires a large number of sampled trajectories to learn effectively and can suffer from high variance in solution quality. In this work, we revisit the overall model-based DRP objective and instead take a minorization-maximization perspective to iteratively optimize the DRP w.r.t. a locally tight lower-bounded objective. This novel formulation of DRP learning as iterative lower bound optimization (ILBO) is particularly appealing because (i) each step is structurally easier to optimize than the overall objective, (ii) it guarantees a monotonically improving objective under certain theoretical conditions, and (iii) it reuses samples between iterations thus lowering sample complexity. Empirical evaluation confirms that ILBO is significantly more sample-efficient than the state-of-the-art DRP planner and consistently produces better solution quality with lower variance. We additionally demonstrate that ILBO generalizes well to new problem instances (i.e., different initial states) without requiring retraining.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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