MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4314946896 · doi:10.1109/cdc51059.2022.9992683

A modified Thompson sampling-based learning algorithm for unknown linear systems

2022· article· en· W4314946896 on OpenAlexaff
Mukul Gagrani, Sagar Sudhakara, Aditya Mahajan, Ashutosh Nayyar, Yi Ouyang

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE 61st Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegretUpper and lower boundsNorm (philosophy)AlgorithmThompson samplingCombinatoricsQuadratic equationSampling (signal processing)Discrete mathematicsMathematicsComputer scienceStatisticsMathematical analysisPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We revisit the Thompson sampling-based learning algorithm for controlling an unknown linear system with quadratic cost proposed in [1]. This algorithm operates in episodes of dynamic length and it is shown to have a regret bound of $\tilde {\mathcal{O}}\left( {\sqrt T } \right)$, where T is the time-horizon. The regret bound of this algorithm is obtained under a technical assumption on the induced norm of the closed loop system. We propose a variation of this algorithm that enforces a lower bound Tminon the episode length. We show that a careful choice of Tmin(that depends on the uncertainty about the system model) allows us to recover the $\tilde {\mathcal{O}}\left( {\sqrt T } \right)$ regret bound under a milder technical condition about the closed loop system.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.171
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE 61st Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)Same topicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207