Cited by 777AI-based Problem Solving and PlanningReinforcement Learning in RoboticsPsychiatry, Mental Health, Neuroscience

Dyna, an Integrated Architecture for Learning, Planning, and Reacting

Sutton, Richard S.·1991·ACM SIGART Bulletin

Abstract

Dyna is an AI architecture that integrates learning, planning, and reactive execution. Learning methods are used in Dyna both for compiling planning results and for updating a model of the effects of the agent's actions on the world. Planning is incremental and can use the probabilistic and ofttimes incorrect world models generated by learning processes. Execution is fully reactive in the sense that no planning intervenes between perception and action. Dyna relies on machine learning methods for learning from examples---these are among the basic building blocks making up the architecture---yet is not tied to any particular method. This paper briefly introduces Dyna and discusses its strengths and weaknesses with respect to other architectures.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/122344.122377

Cites

17 of 17 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?

  • In the Gershman et al. design, subjects acted in a manner consistent with a model-based system having trained by a model-free one during an earlier phase of learning, as in an online or offline form of the DYNA-Q algorithms.

    “In fact, the authors observed that subjects acted in a manner consistent with a model-based system having trained by a model-free one during an earlier phase of learning, as in an online or offline form of the DYNA-Q algorithms mentioned above (Sutton, 1991).”

    From Goals and Habits in the Brain (2013) · cites this paper as Sutton, 1991

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 18 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sutton, R. S.
Affiliations
GTE (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Sutton, Richard S.
Venue
ACM SIGART Bulletin
Published
1991-07
Volume
2
Issue
4
Pages
160-163
ISSN
0163-5719 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1980035368
Cited by
777
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 56 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 63 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 79 · 2020: 115 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 11
FWCI
0.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM SIGART Bulletin (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Psychiatry, Mental Health, Neuroscience
Keywords
learning from examples, planning, model-based learning, incremental planning, learning-based planning

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