Q-LEARNING, POLICY ITERATION AND ACTOR-CRITIC REINFORCEMENT LEARNING COMBINED WITH METAHEURISTIC ALGORITHMS IN SERVO SYSTEM CONTROL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper carries out the performance analysis of three control system structures and approaches, which combine Reinforcement Learning (RL) and Metaheuristic Algorithms (MAs) as representative optimization algorithms. In the first approach, the Gravitational Search Algorithm (GSA) is employed to initialize the parameters (weights and biases) of the Neural Networks (NNs) involved in Deep Q-Learning by replacing the traditional way of initializing the NNs based on random generated values. In the second approach, the Grey Wolf Optimizer (GWO) algorithm is employed to train the policy NN in Policy Iteration RL-based control. In the third approach, the GWO algorithm is employed as a critic in an Actor-Critic framework, and used to evaluate the performance of the actor NN. The goal of this paper is to analyze all three RL-based control approaches, aiming to determine which one represents the best fit for solving the proposed control optimization problem. The performance analysis is based on non-parametric statistical tests conducted on the data obtained from real-time experimental results specific to nonlinear servo system position control.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".