REVIEW 2 cited by
A Practical Guide to Multi-Objective Reinforcement Learning and Planning
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
read the original abstract
Real-world decision-making tasks are generally complex, requiring trade-offs between multiple, often conflicting, objectives. Despite this, the majority of research in reinforcement learning and decision-theoretic planning either assumes only a single objective, or that multiple objectives can be adequately handled via a simple linear combination. Such approaches may oversimplify the underlying problem and hence produce suboptimal results. This paper serves as a guide to the application of multi-objective methods to difficult problems, and is aimed at researchers who are already familiar with single-objective reinforcement learning and planning methods who wish to adopt a multi-objective perspective on their research, as well as practitioners who encounter multi-objective decision problems in practice. It identifies the factors that may influence the nature of the desired solution, and illustrates by example how these influence the design of multi-objective decision-making systems for complex problems.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Test-Time Scaling via Error Localization
TTEL uses feedback-induced token probability drops to localize the first error in a failed reasoning trace and branch a new generation from that prefix, improving pass@k per token on coding and math benchmarks.
-
CuRLA: Curriculum Learning Based Deep Reinforcement Learning for Autonomous Driving
A curriculum that progressively adds traffic and a collision penalty, plus a speed-encouraging reward, increases the average speed of a PPO+VAE driving agent in CARLA while keeping lap distance comparable to a baseline.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.