Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #28542. 	[Title] Analysis of Some Incremental Variants of Policy Iteration: First Steps Toward Understanding Actor-Critic Learning Systems [Abstract] Northeastern University College of Computer Science Technical Report NU-CCS-93-11 fl We gratefully acknowledge the substantial contributions to this effort provided by Andy Barto, who sparked our original interest in these questions and whose continued encouragement and insightful comments and criticisms have helped us greatly. Recent discussions with Satinder Singh and Vijay Gullapalli have also had a helpful impact on this work. Special thanks also to Rich Sutton, who has influenced our thinking on this subject in numerous ways. This work was supported by Grant IRI-8921275 from the National Science Foundation and by the U. S. Air Force. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #124064. 	[Title] An Upper Bound on the Loss from Approximate Optimal-Value Functions [Abstract] Many reinforcement learning (RL) approaches can be formulated from the theory of Markov decision processes and the associated method of dynamic programming (DP). The value of this theoretical understanding, however, is tempered by many practical concerns. One important question is whether DP-based approaches that use function approximation rather than lookup tables, can avoid catastrophic effects on performance. This note presents a result in Bertsekas (1987) which guarantees that small errors in the approximation of a task's optimal value function cannot produce arbitrarily bad performance when actions are selected greedily. We derive an upper bound on performance loss which is slightly tighter than that in Bertsekas (1987), and we show the extension of the bound to Q-learning (Watkins, 1989). These results provide a theoretical justification for a practice that is common in reinforcement learning. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6213. 	[Title] Machine Learning Learning to Predict by the Methods of Temporal Differences Keywords: Incremental learning, prediction, [Abstract] This article introduces a class of incremental learning procedures specialized for prediction|that is, for using past experience with an incompletely known system to predict its future behavior. Whereas conventional prediction-learning methods assign credit by means of the difference between predicted and actual outcomes, the new methods assign credit by means of the difference between temporally successive predictions. Although such temporal-difference methods have been used in Samuel's checker player, Holland's bucket brigade, and the author's Adaptive Heuristic Critic, they have remained poorly understood. Here we prove their convergence and optimality for special cases and relate them to supervised-learning methods. For most real-world prediction problems, temporal-difference methods require less memory and less peak computation than conventional methods; and they produce more accurate predictions. We argue that most problems to which supervised learning is currently applied are really prediction problems of the sort to which temporal-difference methods can be applied to advantage. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6214. 	[Title] Integrated Architectures for Learning, Planning, and Reacting Based on Approximating Dynamic Programming [Abstract] This paper extends previous work with Dyna, a class of architectures for intelligent systems based on approximating dynamic programming methods. Dyna architectures integrate trial-and-error (reinforcement) learning and execution-time planning into a single process operating alternately on the world and on a learned model of the world. In this paper, I present and show results for two Dyna architectures. The Dyna-PI architecture is based on dynamic programming's policy iteration method and can be related to existing AI ideas such as evaluation functions and universal plans (reactive systems). Using a navigation task, results are shown for a simple Dyna-PI system that simultaneously learns by trial and error, learns a world model, and plans optimal routes using the evolving world model. The Dyna-Q architecture is based on Watkins's Q-learning, a new kind of reinforcement learning. Dyna-Q uses a less familiar set of data structures than does Dyna-PI, but is arguably simpler to implement and use. We show that Dyna-Q architectures are easy to adapt for use in changing environments. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #28487. 	[Title] LEARNING TO SOLVE MARKOVIAN DECISION PROCESSES [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #4584. 	[Title] References elements that can solve difficult learning control problems. on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, pages [Abstract] Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. The Psychological Review, 63(2):81-97. Schmidhuber, J. (1990b). Towards compositional learning with dynamic neural networks. Technical Report FKI-129-90, Technische Universitat Munchen, Institut fu Informatik. Servan-Schreiber, D., Cleermans, A., and McClelland, J. (1988). Encoding sequential structure in simple recurrent networks. Technical Report CMU-CS-88-183, Carnegie Mellon University, Computer Science Department. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6220. 	[Title] Issues in Using Function Approximation for Reinforcement Learning [Abstract] Reinforcement learning techniques address the problem of learning to select actions in unknown, dynamic environments. It is widely acknowledged that to be of use in complex domains, reinforcement learning techniques must be combined with generalizing function approximation methods such as artificial neural networks. Little, however, is understood about the theoretical properties of such combinations, and many researchers have encountered failures in practice. In this paper we identify a prime source of such failuresnamely, a systematic overestimation of utility values. Using Watkins' Q-Learning [18] as an example, we give a theoretical account of the phenomenon, deriving conditions under which one may expected it to cause learning to fail. Employing some of the most popular function approximators, we present experimental results which support the theoretical findings. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6224. 	[Title] Tight Performance Bounds on Greedy Policies Based on Imperfect Value Functions [Abstract] Consider a given value function on states of a Markov decision problem, as might result from applying a reinforcement learning algorithm. Unless this value function equals the corresponding optimal value function, at some states there will be a discrepancy, which is natural to call the Bellman residual, between what the value function specifies at that state and what is obtained by a one-step lookahead along the seemingly best action at that state using the given value function to evaluate all succeeding states. This paper derives a tight bound on how far from optimal the discounted return for a greedy policy based on the given value function will be as a function of the maximum norm magnitude of this Bellman residual. A corresponding result is also obtained for value functions defined on state-action pairs, as are used in Q-learning. One significant application of these results is to problems where a function approximator is used to learn a value function, with training of the approxi-mator based on trying to minimize the Bellman residual across states or state-action pairs. When control is based on the use of the resulting value function, this result provides a link between how well the objectives of function approximator training are met and the quality of the resulting control. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #114. 	[Title] Learning to Act using Real-Time Dynamic Programming [Abstract] fl The authors thank Rich Yee, Vijay Gullapalli, Brian Pinette, and Jonathan Bachrach for helping to clarify the relationships between heuristic search and control. We thank Rich Sutton, Chris Watkins, Paul Werbos, and Ron Williams for sharing their fundamental insights into this subject through numerous discussions, and we further thank Rich Sutton for first making us aware of Korf's research and for his very thoughtful comments on the manuscript. We are very grateful to Dimitri Bertsekas and Steven Sullivan for independently pointing out an error in an earlier version of this article. Finally, we thank Harry Klopf, whose insight and persistence encouraged our interest in this class of learning problems. This research was supported by grants to A.G. Barto from the National Science Foundation (ECS-8912623 and ECS-9214866) and the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, Bolling AFB (AFOSR-89-0526). Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #206259. 	[Title] Asynchronous Modified Policy Iteration with Single-sided Updates [Abstract] We present a new algorithm for solving Markov decision problems that extends the modified policy iteration algorithm of Puterman and Shin [6] in two important ways: 1) The new algorithm is asynchronous in that it allows the values of states to be updated in arbitrary order, and it does not need to consider all actions in each state while updating the policy. 2) The new algorithm converges under more general initial conditions than those required by modified policy iteration. Specifically, the set of initial policy-value function pairs for which our algorithm guarantees convergence is a strict superset of the set for which modified policy iteration converges. This generalization was obtained by making a simple and easily implementable change to the policy evaluation operator used in updating the value function. Both the asynchronous nature of our algorithm and its convergence under more general conditions expand the range of problems to which our algorithm can be applied. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6163. 	[Title] Generalization in Reinforcement Learning: Safely Approximating the Value Function [Abstract] To appear in: G. Tesauro, D. S. Touretzky and T. K. Leen, eds., Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 7, MIT Press, Cambridge MA, 1995. A straightforward approach to the curse of dimensionality in reinforcement learning and dynamic programming is to replace the lookup table with a generalizing function approximator such as a neural net. Although this has been successful in the domain of backgammon, there is no guarantee of convergence. In this paper, we show that the combination of dynamic programming and function approximation is not robust, and in even very benign cases, may produce an entirely wrong policy. We then introduce Grow-Support, a new algorithm which is safe from divergence yet can still reap the benefits of successful generalization. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #117. 	[Title] Generalized Markov Decision Processes: Dynamic-programming and Reinforcement-learning Algorithms [Abstract] The problem of maximizing the expected total discounted reward in a completely observable Markovian environment, i.e., a Markov decision process (mdp), models a particular class of sequential decision problems. Algorithms have been developed for making optimal decisions in mdps given either an mdp specification or the opportunity to interact with the mdp over time. Recently, other sequential decision-making problems have been studied prompting the development of new algorithms and analyses. We describe a new generalized model that subsumes mdps as well as many of the recent variations. We prove some basic results concerning this model and develop generalizations of value iteration, policy iteration, model-based reinforcement-learning, and Q-learning that can be used to make optimal decisions in the generalized model under various assumptions. Applications of the theory to particular models are described, including risk-averse mdps, exploration-sensitive mdps, sarsa, Q-learning with spreading, two-player games, and approximate max picking via sampling. Central to the results are the contraction property of the value operator and a stochastic-approximation theorem that reduces asynchronous convergence to synchronous convergence. Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #28542 has the title `Analysis of Some Incremental Variants of Policy Iteration: First Steps Toward Understanding Actor-Critic Learning Systems  
` and the abstract `Northeastern University College of Computer Science Technical Report NU-CCS-93-11 fl We gratefully acknowledge the substantial contributions to this effort provided by Andy Barto, who sparked our original interest in these questions and whose continued encouragement and insightful comments and criticisms have helped us greatly. Recent discussions with Satinder Singh and Vijay Gullapalli have also had a helpful impact on this work. Special thanks also to Rich Sutton, who has influenced our thinking on this subject in numerous ways. This work was supported by Grant IRI-8921275 from the National Science Foundation and by the U. S. Air Force. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #28542 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #28542 has the title `Analysis of Some Incremental Variants of Policy Iteration: First Steps Toward Understanding Actor-Critic Learning Systems  
` and the abstract `Northeastern University College of Computer Science Technical Report NU-CCS-93-11 fl We gratefully acknowledge the substantial contributions to this effort provided by Andy Barto, who sparked our original interest in these questions and whose continued encouragement and insightful comments and criticisms have helped us greatly. Recent discussions with Satinder Singh and Vijay Gullapalli have also had a helpful impact on this work. Special thanks also to Rich Sutton, who has influenced our thinking on this subject in numerous ways. This work was supported by Grant IRI-8921275 from the National Science Foundation and by the U. S. Air Force. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #28542 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].

This paper should be classified into: Reinforcement_Learning