Learning tabula rasa, that is without any prior knowledge, is the prevalent workflow in reinforcement learning (RL) research. However, RL systems, when applied to large-scale settings, rarely operate tabula rasa. Such large-scale systems undergo multiple design or algorithmic changes during their development cycle and use ad hoc approaches for incorporating these changes without re-training from scratch, which would have been prohibitively expensive. Additionally, the inefficiency of deep RL typically excludes researchers without access to industrial-scale resources from tackling computationally-demanding problems. To address these issues, we present reincarnating RL as an alternative workflow, where prior computational work (e.g., learned policies) is reused or transferred between design iterations of an RL agent, or from one RL agent to another. As a step towards enabling reincarnating RL from any agent to any other agent, we focus on the specific setting of efficiently transferring an existing sub-optimal policy to a standalone value-based RL agent. We find that existing approaches fail in this setting and propose a simple algorithm to address their limitations. Equipped with this algorithm, we demonstrate reincarnating RL's gains over tabula rasa RL on Atari 2600 games, a challenging locomotion task, and the real-world problem of navigating stratospheric balloons. Overall, this work argues for an alternative approach to RL research, which we believe could significantly improve real-world RL adoption and help democratize it further.
Continuous-time reinforcement learning offers an appealing formalism for describing control problems in which the passage of time is not naturally divided into discrete increments. Here we consider the problem of predicting the distribution of returns obtained by an agent interacting in a continuous-time, stochastic environment. Accurate return predictions have proven useful for determining optimal policies for risk-sensitive control, learning state representations, multiagent coordination, and more. We begin by establishing the distributional analogue of the Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman (HJB) equation for It\^o diffusions and the broader class of Feller-Dynkin processes. We then specialize this equation to the setting in which the return distribution is approximated by $N$ uniformly-weighted particles, a common design choice in distributional algorithms. Our derivation highlights additional terms due to statistical diffusivity which arise from the proper handling of distributions in the continuous-time setting. Based on this, we propose a tractable algorithm for approximately solving the distributional HJB based on a JKO scheme, which can be implemented in an online control algorithm. We demonstrate the effectiveness of such an algorithm in a synthetic control problem.
In reinforcement learning, state representations are used to tractably deal with large problem spaces. State representations serve both to approximate the value function with few parameters, but also to generalize to newly encountered states. Their features may be learned implicitly (as part of a neural network) or explicitly (for example, the successor representation of \citet{dayan1993improving}). While the approximation properties of representations are reasonably well-understood, a precise characterization of how and when these representations generalize is lacking. In this work, we address this gap and provide an informative bound on the generalization error arising from a specific state representation. This bound is based on the notion of effective dimension which measures the degree to which knowing the value at one state informs the value at other states. Our bound applies to any state representation and quantifies the natural tension between representations that generalize well and those that approximate well. We complement our theoretical results with an empirical survey of classic representation learning methods from the literature and results on the Arcade Learning Environment, and find that the generalization behaviour of learned representations is well-explained by their effective dimension.
Research on exploration in reinforcement learning, as applied to Atari 2600 game-playing, has emphasized tackling difficult exploration problems such as Montezuma's Revenge (Bellemare et al., 2016). Recently, bonus-based exploration methods, which explore by augmenting the environment reward, have reached above-human average performance on such domains. In this paper we reassess popular bonus-based exploration methods within a common evaluation framework. We combine Rainbow (Hessel et al., 2018) with different exploration bonuses and evaluate its performance on Montezuma's Revenge, Bellemare et al.'s set of hard of exploration games with sparse rewards, and the whole Atari 2600 suite. We find that while exploration bonuses lead to higher score on Montezuma's Revenge they do not provide meaningful gains over the simpler $\epsilon$-greedy scheme. In fact, we find that methods that perform best on that game often underperform $\epsilon$-greedy on easy exploration Atari 2600 games. We find that our conclusions remain valid even when hyperparameters are tuned for these easy-exploration games. Finally, we find that none of the methods surveyed benefit from additional training samples (1 billion frames, versus Rainbow's 200 million) on Bellemare et al.'s hard exploration games. Our results suggest that recent gains in Montezuma's Revenge may be better attributed to architecture change, rather than better exploration schemes; and that the real pace of progress in exploration research for Atari 2600 games may have been obfuscated by good results on a single domain.
Deep reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms are predominantly evaluated by comparing their relative performance on a large suite of tasks. Most published results on deep RL benchmarks compare point estimates of aggregate performance such as mean and median scores across tasks, ignoring the statistical uncertainty implied by the use of a finite number of training runs. Beginning with the Arcade Learning Environment (ALE), the shift towards computationally-demanding benchmarks has led to the practice of evaluating only a small number of runs per task, exacerbating the statistical uncertainty in point estimates. In this paper, we argue that reliable evaluation in the few run deep RL regime cannot ignore the uncertainty in results without running the risk of slowing down progress in the field. We illustrate this point using a case study on the Atari 100k benchmark, where we find substantial discrepancies between conclusions drawn from point estimates alone versus a more thorough statistical analysis. With the aim of increasing the field's confidence in reported results with a handful of runs, we advocate for reporting interval estimates of aggregate performance and propose performance profiles to account for the variability in results, as well as present more robust and efficient aggregate metrics, such as interquartile mean scores, to achieve small uncertainty in results. Using such statistical tools, we scrutinize performance evaluations of existing algorithms on other widely used RL benchmarks including the ALE, Procgen, and the DeepMind Control Suite, again revealing discrepancies in prior comparisons. Our findings call for a change in how we evaluate performance in deep RL, for which we present a more rigorous evaluation methodology, accompanied with an open-source library rliable, to prevent unreliable results from stagnating the field.
In most practical applications of reinforcement learning, it is untenable to maintain direct estimates for individual states; in continuous-state systems, it is impossible. Instead, researchers often leverage state similarity (whether explicitly or implicitly) to build models that can generalize well from a limited set of samples. The notion of state similarity used, and the neighbourhoods and topologies they induce, is thus of crucial importance, as it will directly affect the performance of the algorithms. Indeed, a number of recent works introduce algorithms assuming the existence of "well-behaved" neighbourhoods, but leave the full specification of such topologies for future work. In this paper we introduce a unified formalism for defining these topologies through the lens of metrics. We establish a hierarchy amongst these metrics and demonstrate their theoretical implications on the Markov Decision Process specifying the reinforcement learning problem. We complement our theoretical results with empirical evaluations showcasing the differences between the metrics considered.
Reinforcement learning methods trained on few environments rarely learn policies that generalize to unseen environments. To improve generalization, we incorporate the inherent sequential structure in reinforcement learning into the representation learning process. This approach is orthogonal to recent approaches, which rarely exploit this structure explicitly. Specifically, we introduce a theoretically motivated policy similarity metric (PSM) for measuring behavioral similarity between states. PSM assigns high similarity to states for which the optimal policies in those states as well as in future states are similar. We also present a contrastive representation learning procedure to embed any state similarity metric, which we instantiate with PSM to obtain policy similarity embeddings (PSEs). We demonstrate that PSEs improve generalization on diverse benchmarks, including LQR with spurious correlations, a jumping task from pixels, and Distracting DM Control Suite.
We study worst-case guarantees on the expected return of fixed-dataset policy optimization algorithms. Our core contribution is a unified conceptual and mathematical framework for the study of algorithms in this regime. This analysis reveals that for naive approaches, the possibility of erroneous value overestimation leads to a difficult-to-satisfy requirement: in order to guarantee that we select a policy which is near-optimal, we may need the dataset to be informative of the value of every policy. To avoid this, algorithms can follow the pessimism principle, which states that we should choose the policy which acts optimally in the worst possible world. We show why pessimistic algorithms can achieve good performance even when the dataset is not informative of every policy, and derive families of algorithms which follow this principle. These theoretical findings are validated by experiments on a tabular gridworld, and deep learning experiments on four MinAtar environments.
Reinforcement learning with function approximation can be unstable and even divergent, especially when combined with off-policy learning and Bellman updates. In deep reinforcement learning, these issues have been dealt with empirically by adapting and regularizing the representation, in particular with auxiliary tasks. This suggests that representation learning may provide a means to guarantee stability. In this paper, we formally show that there are indeed nontrivial state representations under which the canonical TD algorithm is stable, even when learning off-policy. We analyze representation learning schemes that are based on the transition matrix of a policy, such as proto-value functions, along three axes: approximation error, stability, and ease of estimation. In the most general case, we show that a Schur basis provides convergence guarantees, but is difficult to estimate from samples. For a fixed reward function, we find that an orthogonal basis of the corresponding Krylov subspace is an even better choice. We conclude by empirically demonstrating that these stable representations can be learned using stochastic gradient descent, opening the door to improved techniques for representation learning with deep networks.