EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Yi Wan 0004
dblp:63/506-4
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
3as first author
3since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · unresolved
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 3 first-author · 3 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author
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
4 papers |
Reinforcement learning · 91% Motion planning and robot control · 9% |
Topics — the 11 heaviest of 13, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › markov decision process › infinite-horizon markov decision process
average-reward MDP |
1.0 | 2 | 2021 | Average-Reward Off-Policy Policy Evaluation with Function Approximation · ICML 2021 Learning and Planning in Average-Reward Markov Decision Processes · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
policy evaluation |
0.9 | 2 | 2021 | Average-Reward Off-Policy Policy Evaluation with Function Approximation · ICML 2021 Planning with Expectation Models · IJCAI 2019 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › markov decision process
average-reward reinforcement learning |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Average-Reward Learning and Planning with Options · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
off-policy evaluation |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Average-Reward Off-Policy Policy Evaluation with Function Approximation · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
off-policy reinforcement learning |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Learning and Planning in Average-Reward Markov Decision Processes · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › hierarchical reinforcement learning
options framework |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Average-Reward Learning and Planning with Options · NeurIPS 2021 |
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control › motion planning
sampling-based motion planning |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Average-Reward Learning and Planning with Options · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › hierarchical reinforcement learning
temporal abstraction |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Average-Reward Learning and Planning with Options · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
model-based reinforcement learning |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Planning with Expectation Models · IJCAI 2019 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › model-based reinforcement learning › model-based planning
planning with learned models |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Planning with Expectation Models · IJCAI 2019 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
temporal difference learning |
0.1 | 1 | 2021 | Learning and Planning in Average-Reward Markov Decision Processes · ICML 2021 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
temporal difference error · 0.5options framework · 0.5off-policy learning · 0.5gradient TD · 0.5function approximation · 0.5density ratio estimation · 0.5convergence proof · 0.5sample models · 0.4expectation models · 0.4distribution models · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Learning and Planning in Average-Reward Markov Decision ProcessesabstractWe introduce learning and planning algorithms for average-reward MDPs, including 1) the first general proven-convergent off-policy model-free control algorithm without reference states, 2) the first proven-convergent off-policy model-free prediction algorithm, and 3) the first off-policy learning algorithm that converges to the actual value function rather than to the value function plus an offset. All of our algorithms are based on using the temporal-difference error rather than the conventional error when updating the estimate of the average reward. Our proof techniques are a slight generalization of those by Abounadi, Bertsekas, and Borkar (2001). In experiments with an Access-Control Queuing Task, we show some of the difficulties that can arise when using methods that rely on reference states and argue that our new algorithms are significantly easier to use. Yi Wan 0004, Abhishek Naik, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 1 |
| 2021 | Average-Reward Off-Policy Policy Evaluation with Function ApproximationabstractWe consider off-policy policy evaluation with function approximation (FA) in average-reward MDPs, where the goal is to estimate both the reward rate and the differential value function. For this problem, bootstrapping is necessary and, along with off-policy learning and FA, results in the deadly triad (Sutton & Barto, 2018). To address the deadly triad, we propose two novel algorithms, reproducing the celebrated success of Gradient TD algorithms in the average-reward setting. In terms of estimating the differential value function, the algorithms are the first convergent off-policy linear function approximation algorithms. In terms of estimating the reward rate, the algorithms are the first convergent off-policy linear function approximation algorithms that do not require estimating the density ratio. We demonstrate empirically the advantage of the proposed algorithms, as well as their nonlinear variants, over a competitive density-ratio-based approach, in a simple domain as well as challenging robot simulation tasks. Shangtong Zhang, Yi Wan 0004, Richard S. Sutton, Shimon Whiteson |
ICML | 2 |
| 2021 | Average-Reward Learning and Planning with OptionsabstractWe extend the options framework for temporal abstraction in reinforcement learning from discounted Markov decision processes (MDPs) to average-reward MDPs. Our contributions include general convergent off-policy inter-option learning algorithms, intra-option algorithms for learning values and models, as well as sample-based planning variants of our learning algorithms. Our algorithms and convergence proofs extend those recently developed by Wan, Naik, and Sutton. We also extend the notion of option-interrupting behaviour from the discounted to the average-reward formulation. We show the efficacy of the proposed algorithms with experiments on a continuing version of the Four-Room domain. Yi Wan 0004, Abhishek Naik, Richard S. Sutton |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2019 | Planning with Expectation ModelsabstractDistribution and sample models are two popular model choices in model-based reinforcement learning (MBRL). However, learning these models can be intractable, particularly when the state and action spaces are large. Expectation models, on the other hand, are relatively easier to learn due to their compactness and have also been widely used for deterministic environments. For stochastic environments, it is not obvious how expectation models can be used for planning as they only partially characterize a distribution. In this paper, we propose a sound way of using approximate expectation models for MBRL. In particular, we 1) show that planning with an expectation model is equivalent to planning with a distribution model if the state value function is linear in state features, 2) analyze two common parametrization choices for approximating the expectation: linear and non-linear expectation models, 3) propose a sound model-based policy evaluation algorithm and present its convergence results, and 4) empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed planning algorithm. Yi Wan 0004, Muhammad Zaheer, Adam White 0001, Martha White, Richard S. Sutton |
IJCAI | 1 |