↓ Skip to main content

Linear combination of one-step predictive information with an external reward in an episodic policy gradient setting: a critical analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Linear combination of one-step predictive information with an external reward in an episodic policy gradient setting: a critical analysis
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00801
Pubmed ID
Authors

Keyan Zahedi, Georg Martius, Nihat Ay

Abstract

One of the main challenges in the field of embodied artificial intelligence is the open-ended autonomous learning of complex behaviors. Our approach is to use task-independent, information-driven intrinsic motivation(s) to support task-dependent learning. The work presented here is a preliminary step in which we investigate the predictive information (the mutual information of the past and future of the sensor stream) as an intrinsic drive, ideally supporting any kind of task acquisition. Previous experiments have shown that the predictive information (PI) is a good candidate to support autonomous, open-ended learning of complex behaviors, because a maximization of the PI corresponds to an exploration of morphology- and environment-dependent behavioral regularities. The idea is that these regularities can then be exploited in order to solve any given task. Three different experiments are presented and their results lead to the conclusion that the linear combination of the one-step PI with an external reward function is not generally recommended in an episodic policy gradient setting. Only for hard tasks a great speed-up can be achieved at the cost of an asymptotic performance lost.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Vietnam 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 39 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 27%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Student > Master 3 7%
Professor 3 7%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 9 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 8 20%
Psychology 4 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Engineering 3 7%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Other 10 24%
Unknown 10 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 November 2013.
All research outputs
#14,181,583
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#15,013
of 29,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,559
of 280,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#629
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 280,769 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.