MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306680367 · doi:10.1609/aiide.v18i1.21966

World Models with an Entity-Based Representation

2022· article· en· W4306680367 on OpenAlexafffund
Nazanin Yousefzadeh Khameneh, Matthew Guzdial

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta Machine Intelligence InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningRepresentation (politics)ArchitectureArtificial intelligenceIdeal (ethics)Machine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reinforcement learning (RL) is a powerful way to solve sequential decision-making tasks. However training an RL agent in a complex environment requires a large amount of interactions, which is non-ideal when acting in an environment is costly or dangerous. One alternative is to learn an approximation of the real environment, referred to as a world model. This simulator can be used to train an agent and transfer the learned policy to the real environment. Unfortunately, training world models have traditionally required a significant number of interactions in the real environment. This brings us to the same problem when it is costly or dangerous to act in the real environment. To address this problem, we present an entity-based representation and corresponding architecture, which allows for greater data efficiency in world model training. Our approach outperforms other world model baselines in an initial application to the game Pong.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital EntertainmentSame topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207