MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415222103 · doi:10.1109/msmc.2025.3551811

Attention Prioritized Experience Replay With Application to Self-Driving Cars: Learning From More Informative Experiences Helps Improve the Training Quality

2025· article· en· W4415222103 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Hassani, Soodeh Nikan, Abdallah Shami

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Systems Man and Cybernetics Magazine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoveltyReinforcement learningQuality (philosophy)Control (management)Training (meteorology)Convolutional neural networkMechanism (biology)Salient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep reinforcement learning (DRL) stands out as a powerful solution to the interconnected tasks involved in the control of self-driving cars. To perform control tasks rigorously, DRL models inevitably rely on high-quality observations which in turn make the training of such models computationally expensive. Improving the training efficiency of DRL models is therefore of critical importance, particularly for self-driving cars facing complicated driving scenes and scenarios. This paper proposes a novel attention-based targeted sampling method to improve training of deep Q-networks. Specifically, we utilize a convolutional neural network architecture with a multihead attention mechanism to enhance the agent’s emphasis on salient objects within the scene. The contribution of this work goes back to constructing a scoring mechanism based on the given level of attention to each agent’s experience. By using both the current and next states within each experience tuple, the constructed score encourages novelty in the agent’s training, which consequently speeds up the process. By dynamically prioritizing the replay of scenes using the attention score attributed by the agent, we propose an attention-based prioritized experience replay mechanism to expedite the agent’s training process. By visiting highly scored transitions more frequently, the agent learns from more informative experiences that helps with improving the training quality. By controlling the level of prioritization and bias correction for a driving scenario developed using the Carla simulator, the attained results verify the applicability and superiority of the proposed sampling scheme.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Systems Man and Cybernetics MagazineSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207