跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.01769 · v1

Silent Reward and Environment Defects in EV Charging Simulation Benchmarks: A Diagnostic Checklist

首次提交 2026-11-01 18:18
版本更新 2026-11-01 18:18
雷达观测 2026-11-04 23:43
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Reinforcement-learning (RL) benchmarks built on microscopic traffic simulators such as SUMO are increasingly used to compare agent architectures for electric vehicle (EV) charging assignment. Unlike crashes, defects in the reward function, the environment's stochastic model, or the state encoding often fail silently: the simulation completes, produces plausible numbers, and the comparison is biased. We report five such defects, found by auditing a five-agent benchmark on OpenStreetMap road networks, stated generically: a shared random generator that desynchronises seed-paired comparisons, an ablation-specific reward clip applied unconditionally, a normalisation mismatch that zeroes a reward term, a per-timestep penalty that should fire once per event, and a state dimensionality documented but never wired into the network. We quantify three: a rejection counter inflated up to 125x across agents/cities, a reward term bounded at about $10^{-4}$ of its intended scale, and a 16.6%/16.3% greedy-action divergence from a state-encoding mismatch. Re-analysing a historical ablation, no A1-A2 effect survives family-wise correction; a 56-run campaign confirms the RNG defect's mechanism directly while showing its correction does not change that conclusion. We provide an eight-item checklist as a low-cost first-pass audit; in a later regeneration, three checks caught two new defects while three further process/artefact defects fell outside its boundary.

作者备注:14 pages, 2 figures. Accepted for publication in Bulletin of Electrical Engineering and Informatics (BEEI), ISSN 2089-3191, e-ISSN 2302-9285 (accepted 8 September 2026; in press)

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-01 18:18 · 最新观测版本

Silent Reward and Environment Defects in EV Charging Simulation Benchmarks: A Diagnostic Checklist

Reinforcement-learning (RL) benchmarks built on microscopic traffic simulators such as SUMO are increasingly used to compare agent architectures for electric vehicle (EV) charging assignment. Unlike crashes, defects in the reward function, the environment's stochastic model, or the state encoding often fail silently: the simulation completes, produces plausible numbers, and the comparison is biased. We report five such defects, found by auditing a five-agent benchmark on OpenStreetMap road networks, stated generically: a shared random generator that desynchronises seed-paired comparisons, an ablation-specific reward clip applied unconditionally, a normalisation mismatch that zeroes a reward term, a per-timestep penalty that should fire once per event, and a state dimensionality documented but never wired into the network. We quantify three: a rejection counter inflated up to 125x across agents/cities, a reward term bounded at about $10^{-4}$ of its intended scale, and a 16.6%/16.3% greedy-action divergence from a state-encoding mismatch. Re-analysing a historical ablation, no A1-A2 effect survives family-wise correction; a 56-run campaign confirms the RNG defect's mechanism directly while showing its correction does not change that conclusion. We provide an eight-item checklist as a low-cost first-pass audit; in a later regeneration, three checks caught two new defects while three further process/artefact defects fell outside its boundary.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗