REVIEW 2 cited by
Anti-Concentrated Confidence Bonuses for Scalable Exploration
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Anti-Concentrated Confidence Bonuses for Scalable Exploration
abstract
Intrinsic rewards play a central role in handling the exploration-exploitation trade-off when designing sequential decision-making algorithms, in both foundational theory and state-of-the-art deep reinforcement learning. The LinUCB algorithm, a centerpiece of the stochastic linear bandits literature, prescribes an elliptical bonus which addresses the challenge of leveraging shared information in large action spaces. This bonus scheme cannot be directly transferred to high-dimensional exploration problems, however, due to the computational cost of maintaining the inverse covariance matrix of action features. We introduce \emph{anti-concentrated confidence bounds} for efficiently approximating the elliptical bonus, using an ensemble of regressors trained to predict random noise from policy network-derived features. Using this approximation, we obtain stochastic linear bandit algorithms which obtain $\tilde O(d \sqrt{T})$ regret bounds for $\mathrm{poly}(d)$ fixed actions. We develop a practical variant for deep reinforcement learning that is competitive with contemporary intrinsic reward heuristics on Atari benchmarks.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Quantile of Means: A Bonus-Free Ensemble Method for Minimax Optimal Reinforcement Learning
A quantile-of-means ensemble method achieves minimax optimal variance-dependent regret bounds for finite-horizon MDPs without count-based uncertainty estimates.
-
Representation-Based Exploration for Language Models: From Test-Time to Post-Training
Representation-based elliptical bonuses improve inference-time and post-training pass@k for LLM reasoning, but the headline AIME result is tainted by validation/test overlap.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.