Finding Options that Minimize Planning Time

Authors: Yuu Jinnai, David Abel, David Hershkowitz, Michael Littman, George Konidaris

ICML 2019 | Conference PDF | Archive PDF | Plain Text | LLM Run Details

Reproducibility Variable Result LLM Response
Research Type Experimental Finally, we empirically evaluate the performance of two heuristic approaches for option discovery, betweenness options (S ims ek & Barto, 2009) and Eigenoptions (Machado et al., 2017), against the proposed approximation algorithms and the optimal options in standard grid domains.
Researcher Affiliation Academia Yuu Jinnai 1 David Abel 1 D Ellis Hershkowitz 2 Michael L. Littman 1 George Konidaris 1 1Brown University, Providence, RI, United States 2Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, United States. Correspondence to: Yuu Jinnai <yuu jinnai@brown.edu>.
Pseudocode No The paper describes algorithms (A-MOMI, A-MIMO) but does not provide them in a formal pseudocode block.
Open Source Code No The paper does not provide explicit statements about the release of source code or links to a repository for the described methodology.
Open Datasets No The paper mentions "an 11 x 11 four-room domain and a 9 x 9 grid world" which are standard experimental setups but does not cite a specific public dataset or provide access details.
Dataset Splits No The paper does not explicitly provide training/test/validation dataset splits. It describes grid-based domains without specifying how data was partitioned.
Hardware Specification No The paper does not specify the hardware used to run the experiments.
Software Dependencies No The paper does not provide specific software dependencies with version numbers.
Experiment Setup No The paper describes the grid domains and the goal but does not provide specific experimental setup details such as hyperparameters or system-level training settings.