Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.02652 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866916624786784256 |
|---|---|
| author | Kalyanakrishnan, Shivaram Shah, Sheel Guguloth, Santhosh Kumar |
| author_facet | Kalyanakrishnan, Shivaram Shah, Sheel Guguloth, Santhosh Kumar |
| contents | Reinforcement learning (RL) enables an agent interacting with an unknown MDP $M$ to optimise its behaviour by observing transitions sampled from $M$. A natural entity that emerges in the agent's reasoning is $\widehat{M}$, the maximum likelihood estimate of $M$ based on the observed transitions. The well-known \textit{certainty-equivalence} method (CEM) dictates that the agent update its behaviour to $\widehatπ$, which is an optimal policy for $\widehat{M}$. Not only is CEM intuitive, it has been shown to enjoy minimax-optimal sample complexity in some regions of the parameter space for PAC RL with a generative model~\citep{Agarwal2020GenModel}.
A seemingly unrelated algorithm is the ``trajectory tree method'' (TTM)~\citep{Kearns+MN:1999}, originally developed for efficient decision-time planning in large POMDPs. This paper presents a theoretical investigation that stems from the surprising finding that CEM may indeed be viewed as an application of TTM. The qualitative benefits of this view are (1) new and simple proofs of sample complexity upper bounds for CEM, in fact under a (2) weaker assumption on the rewards than is prevalent in the current literature. Our analysis applies to both non-stationary and stationary MDPs. Quantitatively, we obtain (3) improvements in the sample-complexity upper bounds for CEM both for non-stationary and stationary MDPs, in the regime that the ``mistake probability'' $δ$ is small. Additionally, we show (4) a lower bound on the sample complexity for finite-horizon MDPs, which establishes the minimax-optimality of our upper bound for non-stationary MDPs in the small-$δ$ regime. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2501_02652 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | A View of the Certainty-Equivalence Method for PAC RL as an Application of the Trajectory Tree Method Kalyanakrishnan, Shivaram Shah, Sheel Guguloth, Santhosh Kumar Machine Learning Reinforcement learning (RL) enables an agent interacting with an unknown MDP $M$ to optimise its behaviour by observing transitions sampled from $M$. A natural entity that emerges in the agent's reasoning is $\widehat{M}$, the maximum likelihood estimate of $M$ based on the observed transitions. The well-known \textit{certainty-equivalence} method (CEM) dictates that the agent update its behaviour to $\widehatπ$, which is an optimal policy for $\widehat{M}$. Not only is CEM intuitive, it has been shown to enjoy minimax-optimal sample complexity in some regions of the parameter space for PAC RL with a generative model~\citep{Agarwal2020GenModel}. A seemingly unrelated algorithm is the ``trajectory tree method'' (TTM)~\citep{Kearns+MN:1999}, originally developed for efficient decision-time planning in large POMDPs. This paper presents a theoretical investigation that stems from the surprising finding that CEM may indeed be viewed as an application of TTM. The qualitative benefits of this view are (1) new and simple proofs of sample complexity upper bounds for CEM, in fact under a (2) weaker assumption on the rewards than is prevalent in the current literature. Our analysis applies to both non-stationary and stationary MDPs. Quantitatively, we obtain (3) improvements in the sample-complexity upper bounds for CEM both for non-stationary and stationary MDPs, in the regime that the ``mistake probability'' $δ$ is small. Additionally, we show (4) a lower bound on the sample complexity for finite-horizon MDPs, which establishes the minimax-optimality of our upper bound for non-stationary MDPs in the small-$δ$ regime. |
| title | A View of the Certainty-Equivalence Method for PAC RL as an Application of the Trajectory Tree Method |
| topic | Machine Learning |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.02652 |