Abstract:In deep Reinforcement Learning (RL), value functions are typically approximated using deep neural networks and trained via mean squared error regression objectives to fit the true value functions. Recent research has proposed an alternative approach, utilizing the cross-entropy classification objective, which has demonstrated improved performance and scalability of RL algorithms. However, existing study have not extensively benchmarked the effects of this replacement across various domains, as the primary objective was to demonstrate the efficacy of the concept across a broad spectrum of tasks, without delving into in-depth analysis. Our work seeks to empirically investigate the impact of such a replacement in an offline RL setup and analyze the effects of different aspects on performance. Through large-scale experiments conducted across a diverse range of tasks using different algorithms, we aim to gain deeper insights into the implications of this approach. Our results reveal that incorporating this change can lead to superior performance over state-of-the-art solutions for some algorithms in certain tasks, while maintaining comparable performance levels in other tasks, however for other algorithms this modification might lead to the dramatic performance drop. This findings are crucial for further application of classification approach in research and practical tasks.
Abstract:Humans have an innate drive to seek out causality. Whether fuelled by curiosity or specific goals, we constantly question why things happen, how they are interconnected, and many other related phenomena. To develop AI agents capable of addressing this natural human quest for causality, we urgently need a comprehensive dataset of natural causal questions. Unfortunately, existing datasets either contain only artificially-crafted questions that do not reflect real AI usage scenarios or have limited coverage of questions from specific sources. To address this gap, we present CausalQuest, a dataset of 13,500 naturally occurring questions sourced from social networks, search engines, and AI assistants. We formalize the definition of causal questions and establish a taxonomy for finer-grained classification. Through a combined effort of human annotators and large language models (LLMs), we carefully label the dataset. We find that 42% of the questions humans ask are indeed causal, with the majority seeking to understand the causes behind given effects. Using this dataset, we train efficient classifiers (up to 2.85B parameters) for the binary task of identifying causal questions, achieving high performance with F1 scores of up to 0.877. We conclude with a rich set of future research directions that can build upon our data and models.