SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2108.04115

Modified Double DQN: addressing stability

Abstract

Inspired by Double Q-learning algorithm, the Double-DQN (DDQN) algorithm was originally proposed in order to address the overestimation issue in the original DQN algorithm. The DDQN has successfully shown both theoretically and empirically the importance of decoupling in terms of action evaluation and selection in computation of target values; although, all the benefits were acquired with only a simple adaption to DQN algorithm, minimal possible change as it was mentioned by the authors. Nevertheless, there seems a roll-back in the proposed algorithm of DDQN since the parameters of policy network are emerged again in the target value function which were initially withdrawn by DQN with the hope of tackling the serious issue of moving targets and the instability caused by it (i.e., by moving targets) in the process of learning. Therefore, in this paper three modifications to the DDQN algorithm are proposed with the hope of maintaining the performance in the terms of both stability and overestimation. These modifications are focused on the logic of decoupling the best action selection and evaluation in the target value function and the logic of tackling the moving targets issue. Each of these modifications have their own pros and cons compared to the others. The mentioned pros and cons mainly refer to the execution time required for the corresponding algorithm and the stability provided by the corresponding algorithm. Also, in terms of overestimation, none of the modifications seem to underperform compared to the original DDQN if not outperform it. With the intention of evaluating the efficacy of the proposed modifications, multiple empirical experiments along with theoretical experiments were conducted. The results obtained are represented and discussed in this article.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Shervin Halat, Mohammad Mehdi Ebadzadeh, Kiana Amani. 2021-08-09. Modified Double DQN: addressing stability. https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.04115

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI