MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393159781 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i11.29115

From Past to Future: Rethinking Eligibility Traces

2024· article· en· W4393159781 on OpenAlexaff
Dhawal Gupta, Scott M. Jordan, Shreyas Chaudhari, Bo Liu, Philip S. Thomas, Bruno Castro da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we introduce a fresh perspective on the challenges of credit assignment and policy evaluation. First, we delve into the nuances of eligibility traces and explore instances where their updates may result in unexpected credit assignment to preceding states. From this investigation emerges the concept of a novel value function, which we refer to as the ????????????? ????? ????????. Unlike traditional state value functions, bidirectional value functions account for both future expected returns (rewards anticipated from the current state onward) and past expected returns (cumulative rewards from the episode's start to the present). We derive principled update equations to learn this value function and, through experimentation, demonstrate its efficacy in enhancing the process of policy evaluation. In particular, our results indicate that the proposed learning approach can, in certain challenging contexts, perform policy evaluation more rapidly than TD(λ)–a method that learns forward value functions, v^π, ????????. Overall, our findings present a new perspective on eligibility traces and potential advantages associated with the novel value function it inspires, especially for policy evaluation.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207