Cited by 544Adaptive Dynamic Programming ControlReinforcement Learning in RoboticsAdvanced Control Systems Optimization

Reinforcement Learning for Partially Observable Dynamic Processes: Adaptive Dynamic Programming Using Measured Output Data

Lewis, F L, Vamvoudakis, K G·2011·IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics)

Abstract

Approximate dynamic programming (ADP) is a class of reinforcement learning methods that have shown their importance in a variety of applications, including feedback control of dynamical systems. ADP generally requires full information about the system internal states, which is usually not available in practical situations. In this paper, we show how to implement ADP methods using only measured input/output data from the system. Linear dynamical systems with deterministic behavior are considered herein, which are systems of great interest in the control system community. In control system theory, these types of methods are referred to as output feedback (OPFB). The stochastic equivalent of the systems dealt with in this paper is a class of partially observable Markov decision processes. We develop both policy iteration and value iteration algorithms that converge to an optimal controller that requires only OPFB. It is shown that, similar to Q -learning, the new methods have the important advantage that knowledge of the system dynamics is not needed for the implementation of these learning algorithms or for the OPFB control. Only the order of the system, as well as an upper bound on its "observability index," must be known. The learned OPFB controller is in the form of a polynomial autoregressive moving-average controller that has equivalent performance with the optimal state variable feedback gain.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tsmcb.2010.2043839

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lewis, F. L., & Vamvoudakis, K. G.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at Arlington (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics)
Published
2011-02
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
14-25
ISSN
  • 1083-4419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0492
OpenAlex
W2151966330
Cited by
544
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 19
FWCI
15.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Adaptive Dynamic Programming Control
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Advanced Control Systems Optimization
Keywords
approximate dynamic programming, partially observable Markov decision processes, output feedback control, linear dynamical systems, policy iteration, value iteration, Q-learning, observability index
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence, Feedback, Learning, Markov Chains, Reinforcement, Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review