To bootstrap or to rollout? An optimal and adaptive interpolation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bootstrapping and rollout are two fundamental principles for value function estimation in reinforcement learning (RL). We introduce a novel class of Bellman operators, called subgraph Bellman operators, that interpolate between bootstrapping and rollout methods. Our estimator, derived by solving the fixed point of the empirical subgraph Bellman operator, combines the strengths of the bootstrapping-based temporal difference (TD) estimator and the rollout-based Monte Carlo (MC) methods. Specifically, the error upper bound of our estimator approaches the optimal variance achieved by TD, with an additional term depending on the exit probability of a selected subset of the state space. At the same time, the estimator exhibits the finite-sample adaptivity of MC, with sample complexity depending only on the occupancy measure of this subset. We complement the upper bound with an information-theoretic lower bound, showing that the additional term is unavoidable given a reasonable sample size. Together, these results establish subgraph Bellman estimators as an optimal and adaptive framework for reconciling TD and MC methods in 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".