MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295683034 · doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2025.108521

Multi-step first: A lightweight deep reinforcement learning strategy for robust continuous control with partial observability

2025· preprint· en· W4295683034 on OpenAlexafffund
Lingheng Meng, Rob Gorbet

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Networks · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaAustralian Research CouncilAlliance de recherche numérique du Canada
KeywordsObservabilityRobotComputer scienceState spaceRobustness (evolution)Control theory (sociology)Reinforcement learningControl (management)Control engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) has made tremendous advances in both simulated and real-world robot control tasks in recent years. This is particularly the case for tasks that can be carefully engineered with a full state representation, and which can then be formulated as a Markov Decision Process (MDP). However, applying DRL strategies designed for MDPs to novel robot control tasks can be challenging, because the available observations may be a partial representation of the state, resulting in a Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP). This paper considers three popular DRL algorithms, namely Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO), Twin Delayed Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient (TD3), and Soft Actor-Critic (SAC), invented for MDPs, and studies their performance in POMDP scenarios. While prior work has found that SAC and TD3 typically outperform PPO across a broad range of tasks that can be represented as MDPs, we show that this is not always the case, using three representative POMDP environments. Empirical studies show that this is related to multi-step bootstrapping, where multi-step immediate rewards, instead of one-step immediate reward, are used to calculate the target value estimation of an observation and action pair. We identify this by observing that the inclusion of multi-step bootstrapping in TD3 (MTD3) and SAC (MSAC) results in improved robustness in POMDP settings.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
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 score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeural NetworksSame topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207