Measures of Variability for Risk-averse Policy Gradient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Risk-averse reinforcement learning (RARL) is critical for decision-making under uncertainty, which is especially valuable in high-stake applications. However, most existing works focus on risk measures, e.g., conditional value-at-risk (CVaR), while measures of variability remain underexplored. In this paper, we comprehensively study nine common measures of variability, namely Variance, Gini Deviation, Mean Deviation, Mean-Median Deviation, Standard Deviation, Inter-Quantile Range, CVaR Deviation, Semi_Variance, and Semi_Standard Deviation. Among them, four metrics have not been previously studied in RARL. We derive policy gradient formulas for these unstudied metrics, improve gradient estimation for Gini Deviation, analyze their gradient properties, and incorporate them with the REINFORCE and PPO frameworks to penalize the dispersion of returns. Our empirical study reveals that variance-based metrics lead to unstable policy updates. In contrast, CVaR Deviation and Gini Deviation show consistent performance across different randomness and evaluation domains, achieving high returns while effectively learning risk-averse policies. Mean Deviation and Semi_Standard Deviation are also competitive across different scenarios. This work provides a comprehensive overview of variability measures in RARL, offering practical insights for risk-aware decision-making and guiding future research on risk metrics and RARL algorithms.
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 | 0.007 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".