Then, at policy fork steps.

Third, the value expansion approaches, such as [11, 12], use model-augmented rollouts to improve the estimation accuracyofcumulativereturns.

Designing effective model-based reinforcement learning algorithms is difficult because the ease of data generation must be weighed against the bias of model-generated data. In this paper, we study the role of model usage in policy optimization both theoretically and empirically. We first formulate and analyze a model-based reinforcement learning algorithm with a guarantee of monotonic improvement at each step. In practice, this analysis is overly pessimistic and suggests that real off-policy data is always preferable to model-generated on-policy data, but we show that an empirical estimate of model generalization can be incorporated into such analysis to justify model usage. Motivated by this analysis, we then demonstrate that a simple procedure of using short model-generated rollouts branched from real data has the benefits of more complicated model-based algorithms without the usual pitfalls. In particular, this approach surpasses the sample efficiency of prior model-based methods, matches the asymptotic performance of the best model-free algorithms, and scales to horizons that cause other model-based methods to fail entirely.

Model-based reinforcement learning methods learn a dynamics model with real data sampled from the environment and leverage it to generate simulated data to derive an agent. However, due to the potential distribution mismatch between simulated data and real data, this could lead to degraded performance. Despite much effort being devoted to reducing this distribution mismatch, existing methods fail to solve it explicitly. In this paper, we investigate how to bridge the gap between real and simulated data due to inaccurate model estimation for better policy optimization. To begin with, we first derive a lower bound of the expected return, which naturally inspires a bound maximization algorithm by aligning the simulated and real data distributions. To this end, we propose a novel model-based reinforcement learning framework AMPO, which introduces unsupervised model adaptation to minimize the integral probability metric (IPM) between feature distributions from real and simulated data. Instantiating our framework with Wasserstein-1 distance gives a practical model-based approach. Empirically, our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance in terms of sample efficiency on a range of continuous control benchmark tasks.

Designing effective model-based reinforcement learning algorithms is difficult because the ease of data generation must be weighed against the bias of model-generated data. In this paper, we study the role of model usage in policy optimization both theoretically and empirically. We first formulate and analyze a model-based reinforcement learning algorithm with a guarantee of monotonic improvement at each step. In practice, this analysis is overly pessimistic and suggests that real off-policy data is always preferable to model-generated on-policy data, but we show that an empirical estimate of model generalization can be incorporated into such analysis to justify model usage. Motivated by this analysis, we then demonstrate that a simple procedure of using short model-generated rollouts branched from real data has the benefits of more complicated model-based algorithms without the usual pitfalls.

Model-based reinforcement learning methods learn a dynamics model with real data sampled from the environment and leverage it to generate simulated data to derive an agent. However, due to the potential distribution mismatch between simulated data and real data, this could lead to degraded performance. Despite much effort being devoted to reducing this distribution mismatch, existing methods fail to solve it explicitly. In this paper, we investigate how to bridge the gap between real and simulated data due to inaccurate model estimation for better policy optimization. To begin with, we first derive a lower bound of the expected return, which naturally inspires a bound maximization algorithm by aligning the simulated and real data distributions.

Model-based reinforcement learning approaches leverage a forward dynamics model to support planning and decision making, which, however, may fail catastrophically if the model is inaccurate. Although there are several existing methods dedicated to combating the model error, the potential of the single forward model is still limited. In this paper, we propose to additionally construct a backward dynamics model to reduce the reliance on accuracy in forward model predictions. We develop a novel method, called Bidirectional Model-based Policy Optimization (BMPO) to utilize both the forward model and backward model to generate short branched rollouts for policy optimization. Furthermore, we theoretically derive a tighter bound of return discrepancy, which shows the superiority of BMPO against the one using merely the forward model. Extensive experiments demonstrate that BMPO outperforms state-of-the-art model-based methods in terms of sample efficiency and asymptotic performance.

Designing effective model-based reinforcement learning algorithms is difficult because the ease of data generation must be weighed against the bias of model-generated data. In this paper, we study the role of model usage in policy optimization both theoretically and empirically. We first formulate and analyze a model-based reinforcement learning algorithm with a guarantee of monotonic improvement at each step. In practice, this analysis is overly pessimistic and suggests that real off-policy data is always preferable to model-generated on-policy data, but we show that an empirical estimate of model generalization can be incorporated into such analysis to justify model usage. Motivated by this analysis, we then demonstrate that a simple procedure of using short model-generated rollouts branched from real data has the benefits of more complicated model-based algorithms without the usual pitfalls.

We develop a normative framework for hierarchical model-based policy optimization based on applying second-order methods in the space of all possible state-action paths. The resulting natural path gradient performs policy updates in a manner which is sensitive to the long-range correlational structure of the induced stationary state-action densities. We demonstrate that the natural path gradient can be computed exactly given an environment dynamics model and depends on expressions akin to higher-order successor representations. In simulation, we show that the priorization of local policy updates in the resulting policy flow indeed reflects the intuitive state-space hierarchy in several toy problems.