What Information Buys in Active Inference

Melih Kandemir; Mustafa Mert Çelikok

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.19046

What Information Buys in Active Inference

Melih Kandemir·Mustafa Mert Çelikok

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Information-theoretic exploration is of primary interest in methodological studies of reinforcement learning (RL) and computational cognitive neuroscience, while the established RL theory builds regret guarantees on confidence sets. This situation leaves open the conditions under which the information-driven exploration found in nature is more advantageous than the exploration of the established RL theory. We put the state-of-the-art methods of these two paradigms, Active Inference (AIF) and Bayes-UCBVI, on an equal footing: both act through the same state abstraction of a tabular MDP with $S$ states, and their greedy forms differ only in the exploration term. We find that AIF's information gain decays too fast to serve as a confidence width, locking greedy agents that explore by it out of the optimal action. Calibrating the information gain by a square root yields calibrated AIF, which attains regret of order $\sqrt T$ for an exact abstraction, but no better guarantee than Bayes-UCBVI for a fixed reward. When an adversary chooses rewards from the agent's data, Bayes-UCBVI's value-specific widths lock out, whereas calibrated AIF pays a factor $\sqrt S$, which no goal-memoryless agent avoids on some MDP whose start states the adversary also chooses. Calibrated information gain thus acts as a reward-agnostic $\ell_1$ confidence set, preferable to value-specific widths when rewards are chosen from the agent's data, not when they are fixed.

Explore related subjects

cs.LG stat.ML

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Melih Kandemir, Mustafa Mert Çelikok. 2026-10-13. What Information Buys in Active Inference. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.19046

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Is the Policy Gradient a Gradient?

The policy gradient theorem describes the gradient of the expected discounted return with respect to an agent's policy parameters. However, many policy gradient methods omit the outer discount factor, yielding an update that need not equal the gradient of the discounted objective. Is the resulting update the gradient of another objective? This has been an open question for several years, and this lack of theoretical clarity has led to an abundance of misstatements in the literature. We answer this question for the resulting episode-summed, on-policy update by proving that it need not equal the gradient of any function. Further, we construct a counterexample in which exact expected updates drive the policy toward a deterministic limit that is globally pessimal with respect to both the discounted and undiscounted objectives, while the parameter diverges. We motivate this work by surveying the literature and showing that there remains a widespread misunderstanding regarding discounted policy gradient methods, with errors present even in highly-cited papers published at top conferences.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Harnessing Trust in Directed Graphs: Redefining Robustness of Graph Learning

Existing research on robust Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) focuses predominantly on undirected graphs, overlooking the trustworthiness inherent in the link directions of directed graphs. In this work, we analyze the limitations of current approaches from both the attack and defense perspectives and redefine the robustness of GNNs in directed graphs. From the attack side, we introduce a more realistic directed graph attack setting that addresses the shortcomings of existing attacks. From the defense side, we propose a simple yet effective message-passing framework that serves as a plug-in layer to strengthen GNN robustness while avoiding a false sense of robustness. Our findings show that the trust signals encoded in directed graphs can be harnessed to substantially improve the robustness of GNNs. When combined with existing defense strategies, the framework achieves state-of-the-art robust performance alongside strong clean accuracy against both transfer and adaptive attacks. These results point to a novel and promising direction for strengthening the robustness of graph deep learning.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Learning Agentic Time Series Forecasting via Trajectory Distillation and Memory-Based Reinforcement Learning

Recent agentic time series forecasting (TSF) approaches use large language models (LLMs) to autonomously orchestrate analytical and forecasting tools and reason about temporal patterns using the resulting evidence. However, many such approaches rely on powerful LLMs in training-free, prompt-driven workflows, leaving open whether smaller models can learn these interaction and reasoning capabilities. In this paper, we introduce Cast-R1, an 8Bparameter agentic forecasting model trained through trajectory distillation and multi-turn reinforcement learning with structured memory. First, we develop a forecasting agent harness with specialized analysis and prediction tools to generate multi-turn interaction trajectories using a teacher LLM, which are subsequently evaluated and selected for supervised fine-tuning. Second, we apply group relative policy optimization (GRPO) across multi-turn forecasting episodes, with structured memory preserving diagnostic evidence and intermediate forecasts for state construction. Rewards based on prediction accuracy and temporal structure guide tool selection, model routing, and forecast refinement. A difficulty-aware curriculum combines sample filtering and progressive sample ordering during training. Extensive experiments on multiple datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of Cast-R1. These findings highlight the potential of forecasting-specific post-training to equip smaller LLMs with multi-turn, tool-augmented forecasting capabilities within structured workflows.

cs.LG↗