Towards Sample-Efficiency and Generalization of Transfer and Inverse Reinforcement Learning: A Comprehensive Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reinforcement learning (RL) is a sub-domain of machine learning, mainly concerned with solving sequential decision-making problems by a learning agent that interacts with the decision environment to improve its behaviour through the reward it receives from the environment. This learning paradigm is, however, well-known for being time-consuming due to the necessity of collecting a large amount of data, making RL suffer from sample inefficiency and difficult generalization. Furthermore, the construction of an explicit reward function that accounts for the trade-off between multiple desiderata of a decision problem is often a laborious task. These challenges have been recently addressed utilizing transfer and inverse RL (T-IRL). In this regard, this paper is devoted to a comprehensive review of realizing the sample efficiency and generalization of RL algorithms through T-IRL. Following a brief introduction to RL, the fundamental T-IRL methods are presented and the most recent advancements in each research field have been extensively reviewed. Our findings denote that a majority of recent research works have dealt with the aforementioned challenges by utilizing human-in-the-loop and sim-to-real strategies for the efficient transfer of knowledge from source domains to the target domain under the transfer learning scheme. Under the IRL structure, training schemes that require a low number of experience transitions and extension of such frameworks to multi-agent and multi-intention problems have been the priority of researchers in recent years. This survey first reviews the theoretical foundations of RL and its challenges, then presents recent advances in T-IRL, and concludes with a discussion of open research directions and future trends.
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 | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".