TBQ($σ$): Improving Efficiency of Trace Utilization for Off-Policy Reinforcement Learning

17 May 2019  ·  Longxiang Shi, Shijian Li, Longbing Cao, Long Yang, Gang Pan ·

Off-policy reinforcement learning with eligibility traces is challenging because of the discrepancy between target policy and behavior policy. One common approach is to measure the difference between two policies in a probabilistic way, such as importance sampling and tree-backup. However, existing off-policy learning methods based on probabilistic policy measurement are inefficient when utilizing traces under a greedy target policy, which is ineffective for control problems. The traces are cut immediately when a non-greedy action is taken, which may lose the advantage of eligibility traces and slow down the learning process. Alternatively, some non-probabilistic measurement methods such as General Q($\lambda$) and Naive Q($\lambda$) never cut traces, but face convergence problems in practice. To address the above issues, this paper introduces a new method named TBQ($\sigma$), which effectively unifies the tree-backup algorithm and Naive Q($\lambda$). By introducing a new parameter $\sigma$ to illustrate the \emph{degree} of utilizing traces, TBQ($\sigma$) creates an effective integration of TB($\lambda$) and Naive Q($\lambda$) and continuous role shift between them. The contraction property of TB($\sigma$) is theoretically analyzed for both policy evaluation and control settings. We also derive the online version of TBQ($\sigma$) and give the convergence proof. We empirically show that, for $\epsilon\in(0,1]$ in $\epsilon$-greedy policies, there exists some degree of utilizing traces for $\lambda\in[0,1]$, which can improve the efficiency in trace utilization for off-policy reinforcement learning, to both accelerate the learning process and improve the performance.

PDF Abstract

Datasets


  Add Datasets introduced or used in this paper

Results from the Paper


  Submit results from this paper to get state-of-the-art GitHub badges and help the community compare results to other papers.

Methods


No methods listed for this paper. Add relevant methods here