Autonomous Driving Systems for Decision-Making Under Uncertainty Using Deep Reinforcement Learning
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
Deep reinforcement learning has achieved human-level and even beyond performance on complex tasks like Atari games and Go. However, this performance is not easy to adapt to autonomous driving since real world state spaces are extremely complex and have continuous action spaces. Besides, autonomous driving tasks often require decision making under uncertainty. Hence, the autonomous driving problem can be formulated as a partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP).In this paper, we propose a new approach to solve the autonomous driving problem based on decision making under uncertainty as a partially observable Markov decision process, using Guided Soft Actor-Critic (Guided SAC). Self driving car has been trained for the scenario where it encountered with a pedestrian crossing the road. Experiments show that the control agent exhibits desirable control behavior and performed close to the fully observable state under various uncertainty situations.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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