Continuous-Time Fitted Value Iteration for Robust Policies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solving the Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equation is important in many domains including control, robotics and economics. Especially for continuous control, solving this differential equation and its extension the Hamilton-Jacobi-Isaacs equation, is important as it yields the optimal policy that achieves the maximum reward on a give task. In the case of the Hamilton-Jacobi-Isaacs equation, which includes an adversary controlling the environment and minimizing the reward, the obtained policy is also robust to perturbations of the dynamics. In this paper we propose continuous fitted value iteration (cFVI) and robust fitted value iteration (rFVI). These algorithms leverage the non-linear control-affine dynamics and separable state and action reward of many continuous control problems to derive the optimal policy and optimal adversary in closed form. This analytic expression simplifies the differential equations and enables us to solve for the optimal value function using value iteration for continuous actions and states as well as the adversarial case. Notably, the resulting algorithms do not require discretization of states or actions. We apply the resulting algorithms to the Furuta pendulum and cartpole. We show that both algorithms obtain the optimal policy. The robustness Sim2Real experiments on the physical systems show that the policies successfully achieve the task in the real-world. When changing the masses of the pendulum, we observe that robust value iteration is more robust compared to deep reinforcement learning algorithm and the non-robust version of the algorithm. Videos of the experiments are shown at https://sites.google.com/view/rfvi
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".