Goto

Collaborating Authors

 episodic reinforcement


Is Long Horizon RL More Difficult Than Short Horizon RL?

Neural Information Processing Systems

Learning to plan for long horizons is a central challenge in episodic reinforcement learning problems. A fundamental question is to understand how the difficulty of the problem scales as the horizon increases. Here the natural measure of sample complexity is a normalized one: we are interested in the \emph{number of episodes} it takes to provably discover a policy whose value is $\varepsilon$ near to that of the optimal value, where the value is measured by the \emph{normalized} cumulative reward in each episode. In a COLT 2018 open problem, Jiang and Agarwal conjectured that, for tabular, episodic reinforcement learning problems, there exists a sample complexity lower bound which exhibits a polynomial dependence on the horizon --- a conjecture which is consistent with all known sample complexity upper bounds. This work refutes this conjecture, proving that tabular, episodic reinforcement learning is possible with a sample complexity that scales only \emph{logarithmically} with the planning horizon. In other words, when the values are appropriately normalized (to lie in the unit interval), this results shows that long horizon RL is no more difficult than short horizon RL, at least in a minimax sense. Our analysis introduces two ideas: (i) the construction of an $\varepsilon$-net for near-optimal policies whose log-covering number scales only logarithmically with the planning horizon, and (ii) the Online Trajectory Synthesis algorithm, which adaptively evaluates all policies in a given policy class and enjoys a sample complexity that scales logarithmically with the cardinality of the given policy class. Both may be of independent interest.


Is Long Horizon RL More Difficult Than Short Horizon RL?

Neural Information Processing Systems

Learning to plan for long horizons is a central challenge in episodic reinforcement learning problems. A fundamental question is to understand how the difficulty of the problem scales as the horizon increases. Here the natural measure of sample complexity is a normalized one: we are interested in the \emph{number of episodes} it takes to provably discover a policy whose value is \varepsilon near to that of the optimal value, where the value is measured by the \emph{normalized} cumulative reward in each episode. In a COLT 2018 open problem, Jiang and Agarwal conjectured that, for tabular, episodic reinforcement learning problems, there exists a sample complexity lower bound which exhibits a polynomial dependence on the horizon --- a conjecture which is consistent with all known sample complexity upper bounds. This work refutes this conjecture, proving that tabular, episodic reinforcement learning is possible with a sample complexity that scales only \emph{logarithmically} with the planning horizon.


Constrained episodic reinforcement learning in concave-convex and knapsack settings

Neural Information Processing Systems

We propose an algorithm for tabular episodic reinforcement learning with constraints. We provide a modular analysis with strong theoretical guarantees for settings with concave rewards and convex constraints, and for settings with hard constraints (knapsacks). Most of the previous work in constrained reinforcement learning is limited to linear constraints, and the remaining work focuses on either the feasibility question or settings with a single episode. Our experiments demonstrate that the proposed algorithm significantly outperforms these approaches in existing constrained episodic environments.


Is Long Horizon RL More Difficult Than Short Horizon RL?

Neural Information Processing Systems

Learning to plan for long horizons is a central challenge in episodic reinforcement learning problems. A fundamental question is to understand how the difficulty of the problem scales as the horizon increases. Here the natural measure of sample complexity is a normalized one: we are interested in the \emph{number of episodes} it takes to provably discover a policy whose value is \varepsilon near to that of the optimal value, where the value is measured by the \emph{normalized} cumulative reward in each episode. In a COLT 2018 open problem, Jiang and Agarwal conjectured that, for tabular, episodic reinforcement learning problems, there exists a sample complexity lower bound which exhibits a polynomial dependence on the horizon --- a conjecture which is consistent with all known sample complexity upper bounds. This work refutes this conjecture, proving that tabular, episodic reinforcement learning is possible with a sample complexity that scales only \emph{logarithmically} with the planning horizon.


Optimism and Delays in Episodic Reinforcement Learning

Howson, Benjamin, Pike-Burke, Ciara, Filippi, Sarah

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

There are many algorithms for regret minimisation in episodic reinforcement learning. This problem is well-understood from a theoretical perspective, providing that the sequences of states, actions and rewards associated with each episode are available to the algorithm updating the policy immediately after every interaction with the environment. However, feedback is almost always delayed in practice. In this paper, we study the impact of delayed feedback in episodic reinforcement learning from a theoretical perspective and propose two general-purpose approaches to handling the delays. The first involves updating as soon as new information becomes available, whereas the second waits before using newly observed information to update the policy. For the class of optimistic algorithms and either approach, we show that the regret increases by an additive term involving the number of states, actions, episode length, the expected delay and an algorithm-dependent constant. We empirically investigate the impact of various delay distributions on the regret of optimistic algorithms to validate our theoretical results.