MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360764167 · doi:10.1109/icmla55696.2022.00101

Hyperparameter Tuning in Offline Reinforcement Learning

2022· article· en· W4360764167 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Tittaferrante, Abdulsalam Yassine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperparameterReinforcement learningBenchmark (surveying)Metric (unit)Computer scienceMachine learningPerformance metricArtificial intelligenceScheme (mathematics)Hyperparameter optimizationFriedman testStatistical hypothesis testingStatisticsMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we propose a reliable hyperparameter tuning scheme for offline reinforcement learning. We demonstrate our proposed scheme using the simplest antmaze environment from the standard benchmark offline dataset, D4RL. The usual approach for policy evaluation in offline reinforcement learning involves online evaluation, i.e., cherry-picking best performance on the test environment. To mitigate this cherry-picking, we propose an ad-hoc online evaluation metric, which we name "median-median-return". This metric enables more reliable reporting of results because it represents the expected performance of the learned policy by taking the median online evaluation performance across both epochs and training runs. To demonstrate our scheme, we employ the recently state-of-the-art algorithm, IQL, and perform a thorough hyperparameter search based on our proposed metric. The tuned architectures enjoy notably stronger cherry-picked performance, and the best models are able to surpass the reported state-of-the-art performance on average.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207