Convergence of regularized agent-state-based Q-learning in POMDPs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present a framework to understand the convergence of commonly used Q-learning reinforcement learning algorithms in practice. Two salient features of such algorithms are: (i) the Q-table is recursively updated using an agent state (such as the state of a recurrent neural network) which is not a belief state or an information state and (ii) policy regularization is often used to encourage exploration and stabilize the learning algorithm. We investigate the simplest form of such Q-learning algorithms which we call regularized agent-state-based Q-learning (RASQL) and show that it converges under mild technical conditions to the fixed point of an appropriately defined regularized MDP, which depends on the stationary distribution induced by the behavioral policy. We also show that a similar analysis continues to work for a variant of RASQL that learns periodic policies. We present numerical examples to illustrate that the empirical convergence behavior matches with the proposed theoretical limit.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it