A Transfer Approach Using Graph Neural Networks in Deep Reinforcement Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transfer learning (TL) has shown great potential to improve Reinforcement Learning (RL) efficiency by leveraging prior knowledge in new tasks. However, much of the existing TL research focuses on transferring knowledge between tasks that share the same state-action spaces. Further, transfer from multiple source tasks that have different state-action spaces is more challenging and needs to be solved urgently to improve the generalization and practicality of the method in real-world scenarios. This paper proposes TURRET (Transfer Using gRaph neuRal nETworks), to utilize the generalization capabilities of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) to facilitate efficient and effective multi-source policy transfer learning in the state-action mismatch setting. TURRET learns a semantic representation by accounting for the intrinsic property of the agent through GNNs, which leads to a unified state embedding space for all tasks. As a result, TURRET achieves more efficient transfer with strong generalization ability between different tasks and can be easily combined with existing Deep RL algorithms. Experimental results show that TURRET significantly outperforms other TL methods on multiple continuous action control tasks, successfully transferring across robots with different state-action spaces.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".