MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6891724308 · doi:10.48448/ey03-4n67

A Distributional Framework for Risk-Sensitive End-to-End Planning in Continuous MDPs

2022· other· en· W6891724308 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUnderline Science Inc. · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBackpropagationLeverage (statistics)NoveltyKey (lock)Markov decision processProbability distributionStochastic optimizationOptimization problemReinforcement learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advances in efficient planning in deterministic or stochastic high-dimensional domains with continuous action spaces leverage backpropagation through a model of the environment to directly optimize action sequences. However, existing methods typically do not take risk into account when optimizing in stochastic domains, which can be incorporated efficiently in MDPs by optimizing a nonlinear utility function of the return distribution. We bridge this gap by introducing Risk-Aware Planning using PyTorch (RAPTOR), a novel unified framework for risk-sensitive planning through end-to-end optimization of commonly-studied risk-sensitive utility functions such as entropic utility, mean-variance optimization and CVaR. A key technical difficulty of our approach is that direct optimization of general risk-sensitive utility functions by backpropagation is impossible due to the presence of environment stochasticity. The novelty of RAPTOR lies in leveraging reparameterization of the state distribution, leading to a unique distributional perspective of end-to-end planning where the return distribution is utilized for sampling as well as optimizing risk-aware objectives by backpropagation in a unified framework. We evaluate and compare RAPTOR on three highly stochastic MDPs, including nonlinear navigation, HVAC control, and linear reservoir control, demonstrating the ability of RAPTOR to manage risk in complex continuous domains according to different notions of risk-sensitive utility.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnderline Science Inc.French-language works237,207