Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Matthew Soh

dblp:236/6110 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
2 papers
Reinforcement learning · 100%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › value-based reinforcement learning
q-learning
0.822019
Stabilizing Off-Policy Q-Learning via Bootstrapping Error Reduction · NeurIPS 2019
Diagnosing Bottlenecks in Deep Q-learning Algorithms · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › temporal difference learning
bootstrapping error
0.412019
Stabilizing Off-Policy Q-Learning via Bootstrapping Error Reduction · NeurIPS 2019
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
deep reinforcement learning
0.412019
Diagnosing Bottlenecks in Deep Q-learning Algorithms · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
function approximation
0.412019
Diagnosing Bottlenecks in Deep Q-learning Algorithms · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
off-policy reinforcement learning
0.412019
Stabilizing Off-Policy Q-Learning via Bootstrapping Error Reduction · NeurIPS 2019
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
value-based reinforcement learning
0.412019
Diagnosing Bottlenecks in Deep Q-learning Algorithms · ICML 2019
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
value function estimation
0.412019
Stabilizing Off-Policy Q-Learning via Bootstrapping Error Reduction · NeurIPS 2019

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

unit testing framework · 0.4oracle-based analysis · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2019 Diagnosing Bottlenecks in Deep Q-learning Algorithms
abstract
Q-learning methods are a common class of algorithms used in reinforcement learning (RL). However, their behavior with function approximation, especially with neural networks, is poorly understood theoretically and empirically. In this work, we aim to experimentally investigate potential issues in Q-learning, by means of a "unit testing" framework where we can utilize oracles to disentangle sources of error. Specifically, we investigate questions related to function approximation, sampling error and nonstationarity, and where available, verify if trends found in oracle settings hold true with deep RL methods. We find that large neural network architectures have many benefits with regards to learning stability; offer several practical compensations for overfitting; and develop a novel sampling method based on explicitly compensating for function approximation error that yields fair improvement on high-dimensional continuous control domains.
Justin Fu, Aviral Kumar, Matthew Soh, Sergey Levine
ICML3
2019 Stabilizing Off-Policy Q-Learning via Bootstrapping Error Reduction
abstract
Off-policy reinforcement learning aims to leverage experience collected from prior policies for sample-efficient learning. However, in practice, commonly used off-policy approximate dynamic programming methods based on Q-learning and actor-critic methods are highly sensitive to the data distribution, and can make only limited progress without collecting additional on-policy data. As a step towards more robust off-policy algorithms, we study the setting where the off-policy experience is fixed and there is no further interaction with the environment. We identify \emph{bootstrapping error} as a key source of instability in current methods. Bootstrapping error is due to bootstrapping from actions that lie outside of the training data distribution, and it accumulates via the Bellman backup operator. We theoretically analyze bootstrapping error, and demonstrate how carefully constraining action selection in the backup can mitigate it. Based on our analysis, we propose a practical algorithm, bootstrapping error accumulation reduction (BEAR). We demonstrate that BEAR is able to learn robustly from different off-policy distributions, including random data and suboptimal demonstrations, on a range of continuous control tasks.
Aviral Kumar, Justin Fu, Matthew Soh, George Tucker, Sergey Levine
NeurIPS3