4.6 Article

Hybrid MDP based integrated hierarchical Q-learning

Journal

SCIENCE CHINA-INFORMATION SCIENCES
Volume 54, Issue 11, Pages 2279-2294

Publisher

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s11432-011-4332-6

Keywords

reinforcement learning; hierarchical Q-learning; hybrid MDP; temporal abstraction

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [60805029, 60703083]
  2. National Creative Research Groups Science Foundation of China [60721062]
  3. Fundamental Research Foundations for the Central Universities [2010QNA5014]
  4. City University of Hong Kong [7008057, 9360131]
  5. Australian Research Council [DP1095540]
  6. Australian Research Council [DP1095540] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As a widely used reinforcement learning method, Q-learning is bedeviled by the curse of dimensionality: The computational complexity grows dramatically with the size of state-action space. To combat this difficulty, an integrated hierarchical Q-learning framework is proposed based on the hybrid Markov decision process (MDP) using temporal abstraction instead of the simple MDP. The learning process is naturally organized into multiple levels of learning, e.g., quantitative (lower) level and qualitative (upper) level, which are modeled as MDP and semi-MDP (SMDP), respectively. This hierarchical control architecture constitutes a hybrid MDP as the model of hierarchical Q-learning, which bridges the two levels of learning. The proposed hierarchical Q-learning can scale up very well and speed up learning with the upper level learning process. Hence this approach is an effective integral learning and control scheme for complex problems. Several experiments are carried out using a puzzle problem in a gridworld environment and a navigation control problem for a mobile robot. The experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed approach.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available