Model-based reinforcement learning (RL) is appealing because (i) it enables planning and thus more strategic exploration, and (ii) by decoupling dynamics from rewards, it enables fast transfer to new reward functions. However, learning an accurate Markov Decision Process (MDP) over high-dimensional states (e.g., raw pixels) is extremely challenging because it requires function approximation, which leads to compounding errors. Instead, to avoid compounding errors, we propose learning an abstract MDP over abstract states: low-dimensional coarse representations of the state (e.g., capturing agent position, ignoring other objects). We assume access to an abstraction function that maps the concrete states to abstract states. In our approach, we construct an abstract MDP, which grows through strategic exploration via planning. Similar to hierarchical RL approaches, the abstract actions of the abstract MDP are backed by learned subpolicies that navigate between abstract states. Our approach achieves strong results on three of the hardest Arcade Learning Environment games (Montezuma's Revenge, Pitfall!, and Private Eye), including superhuman performance on Pitfall! without demonstrations. After training on one task, we can reuse the learned abstract MDP for new reward functions, achieving higher reward in 1000x fewer samples than model-free methods trained from scratch.
Contextual bandits often provide simple and effective personalization in decision making problems, making them popular in many domains including digital health. However, when bandits are deployed in the context of a scientific study, the aim is not only to personalize for an individual, but also to determine, with sufficient statistical power, whether or not the system's intervention is effective. In this work, we develop a set of constraints and a general meta-algorithm that can be used to both guarantee power constraints and minimize regret. Our results demonstrate a number of existing algorithms can be easily modified to satisfy the constraint without significant decrease in average return. We also show that our modification is also robust to a variety of model mis-specifications.
Interactive adaptive systems powered by Reinforcement Learning (RL) have many potential applications, such as intelligent tutoring systems. In such systems there is typically an external human system designer that is creating, monitoring and modifying the interactive adaptive system, trying to improve its performance on the target outcomes. In this paper we focus on algorithmic foundation of how to help the system designer choose the set of sensors or features to define the observation space used by reinforcement learning agent. We present an algorithm, value driven representation (VDR), that can iteratively and adaptively augment the observation space of a reinforcement learning agent so that is sufficient to capture a (near) optimal policy. To do so we introduce a new method to optimistically estimate the value of a policy using offline simulated Monte Carlo rollouts. We evaluate the performance of our approach on standard RL benchmarks with simulated humans and demonstrate significant improvement over prior baselines.
When observed decisions depend only on observed features, off-policy policy evaluation (OPE) methods for sequential decision making problems can estimate the performance of evaluation policies before deploying them. This assumption is frequently violated due to unobserved confounders, unrecorded variables that impact both the decisions and their outcomes. We assess robustness of OPE methods under unobserved confounding by developing worst-case bounds on the performance of an evaluation policy. When unobserved confounders can affect every decision in an episode, we demonstrate that even small amounts of per-decision confounding can heavily bias OPE methods. Fortunately, in a number of important settings found in healthcare, policy-making, operations, and technology, unobserved confounders may primarily affect only one of the many decisions made. Under this less pessimistic model of one-decision confounding, we propose an efficient loss-minimization-based procedure for computing worst-case bounds, and prove its statistical consistency. On two simulated healthcare examples---management of sepsis patients and developmental interventions for autistic children---where this is a reasonable model of confounding, we demonstrate that our method invalidates non-robust results and provides meaningful certificates of robustness, allowing reliable selection of policies even under unobserved confounding.
We study the exploration problem with approximate linear action-value functions in episodic reinforcement learning under the notion of low inherent Bellman error, a condition normally employed to show convergence of approximate value iteration. First we relate this condition to other common frameworks and show that it is strictly more general than the low rank (or linear) MDP assumption of prior work. Second we provide an algorithm with a high probability regret bound $\widetilde O(\sum_{t=1}^H d_t \sqrt{K} + \sum_{t=1}^H \sqrt{d_t} \IBE K)$ where $H$ is the horizon, $K$ is the number of episodes, $\IBE$ is the value if the inherent Bellman error and $d_t$ is the feature dimension at timestep $t$. In addition, we show that the result is unimprovable beyond constants and logs by showing a matching lower bound. This has two important consequences: 1) the algorithm has the optimal statistical rate for this setting which is more general than prior work on low-rank MDPs 2) the lack of closedness (measured by the inherent Bellman error) is only amplified by $\sqrt{d_t}$ despite working in the online setting. Finally, the algorithm reduces to the celebrated \textsc{LinUCB} when $H=1$ but with a different choice of the exploration parameter that allows handling misspecified contextual linear bandits. While computational tractability questions remain open for the MDP setting, this enriches the class of MDPs with a linear representation for the action-value function where statistically efficient reinforcement learning is possible.
Off-policy evaluation in reinforcement learning offers the chance of using observational data to improve future outcomes in domains such as healthcare and education, but safe deployment in high stakes settings requires ways of assessing its validity. Traditional measures such as confidence intervals may be insufficient due to noise, limited data and confounding. In this paper we develop a method that could serve as a hybrid human-AI system, to enable human experts to analyze the validity of policy evaluation estimates. This is accomplished by highlighting observations in the data whose removal will have a large effect on the OPE estimate, and formulating a set of rules for choosing which ones to present to domain experts for validation. We develop methods to compute exactly the influence functions for fitted Q-evaluation with two different function classes: kernel-based and linear least squares. Experiments on medical simulations and real-world intensive care unit data demonstrate that our method can be used to identify limitations in the evaluation process and make evaluation more robust.
Accurate reporting of energy and carbon usage is essential for understanding the potential climate impacts of machine learning research. We introduce a framework that makes this easier by providing a simple interface for tracking realtime energy consumption and carbon emissions, as well as generating standardized online appendices. Utilizing this framework, we create a leaderboard for energy efficient reinforcement learning algorithms to incentivize responsible research in this area as an example for other areas of machine learning. Finally, based on case studies using our framework, we propose strategies for mitigation of carbon emissions and reduction of energy consumption. By making accounting easier, we hope to further the sustainable development of machine learning experiments and spur more research into energy efficient algorithms.
We study the problem of estimating the expected reward of the optimal policy in the stochastic disjoint linear bandit setting. We prove that for certain settings it is possible to obtain an accurate estimate of the optimal policy value even with a number of samples that is sublinear in the number that would be required to \emph{find} a policy that realizes a value close to this optima. We establish nearly matching information theoretic lower bounds, showing that our algorithm achieves near optimal estimation error. Finally, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our algorithm on joke recommendation and cancer inhibition dosage selection problems using real datasets.