CCLF: A Contrastive-Curiosity-Driven Learning Framework for Sample-Efficient Reinforcement Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In reinforcement learning (RL), it is challenging to learn directly from high-dimensional observations, where data augmentation has recently remedied it via encoding invariances from raw pixels. Nevertheless, we empirically find that not all samples are equally important and hence simply injecting more augmented inputs may instead cause instability in Q-learning. In this paper, we approach this problem systematically by developing a model-agnostic Contrastive-Curiosity-driven Learning Framework (CCLF), which can fully exploit sample importance and improve learning efficiency in a self-supervised manner. Facilitated by the proposed contrastive curiosity, CCLF is capable of prioritizing the experience replay, selecting the most informative augmented inputs, and more importantly regularizing the Q-function as well as the encoder to concentrate more on under-learned data. Moreover, it encourages the agent to explore with a curiosity-based reward. As a result, the agent can focus on more informative samples and learn representation invariances more efficiently, with significantly reduced augmented inputs. We apply CCLF to several base RL algorithms and evaluate on the DeepMind Control Suite, Atari, and MiniGrid benchmarks, where our approach demonstrates superior sample efficiency and learning performances compared with other state-of-the-art methods. Our code is available at https://github.com/csun001/CCLF.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".