Search for: All records

Reward is the driving force for reinforcement-learning agents. This paper is dedicated to understanding the expressivity of reward as a way to capture tasks that we would want an agent to perform. We frame this study around three new abstract notions of “task” that might be desirable: (1) a set of acceptable behaviors, (2) a partial ordering over behaviors, or (3) a partial ordering over trajectories. Our main results prove that while reward can express many of these tasks, there exist instances of each task type that no Markov reward function can capture. We then provide a set of polynomial-time algorithms that construct a Markov reward function that allows an agent to optimize tasks of each of these three types, and correctly determine when no such reward function exists. We conclude with an empirical study that corroborates and illustrates our theoretical findings. 

Effective options can make reinforcement learning easier by enhancing an agent's ability to both explore in a targeted manner and plan further into the future. However, learning an appropriate model of an option's dynamics in hard, requiring estimating a highly parameterized probability distribution. This paper introduces and motivates the Expected-Length Model (ELM) for options, an alternate model for transition dynamics. We prove ELM is a (biased) estimator of the traditional Multi-Time Model (MTM), but provide a non-vacuous bound on their deviation. We further prove that, in stochastic shortest path problems, ELM induces a value function that is sufficiently similar to the one induced by MTM, and is thus capable of supporting near-optimal behavior. We explore the practical utility of this option model experimentally, finding consistent support for the thesis that ELM is a suitable replacement for MTM. In some cases, we find ELM leads to more sample efficient learning, especially when options are arranged in a hierarchy. 

The combinatorial explosion that plagues planning and reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms can be moderated using state abstraction. Prohibitively large task representations can be condensed such that essential information is preserved, and consequently, solutions are tractably computable. However, exact abstractions, which treat only fully-identical situations as equivalent, fail to present opportunities for abstraction in environments where no two situations are exactly alike. In this work, we investigate approximate state abstractions, which treat nearly-identical situations as equivalent. We present theoretical guarantees of the quality of behaviors derived from four types of approximate abstractions. Additionally, we empirically demonstrate that approximate abstractions lead to reduction in task complexity and bounded loss of optimality of behavior in a variety of environments.