Paper detail

Designing Rewards for Fast Learning

To convey desired behavior to a Reinforcement Learning (RL) agent, a designer must choose a reward function for the environment, arguably the most important knob designers have in interacting with RL agents. Although many reward functions induce the same optimal behavior (Ng et al., 1999), in practice, some of them result in faster learning than others. In this paper, we look at how reward-design choices impact learning speed and seek to identify principles of good reward design that quickly induce target behavior. This reward-identification problem is framed as an optimization problem: Firstly, we advocate choosing state-based rewards that maximize the action gap, making optimal actions easy to distinguish from suboptimal ones. Secondly, we propose minimizing a measure of the horizon, something we call the "subjective discount", over which rewards need to be optimized to encourage agents to make optimal decisions with less lookahead. To solve this optimization problem, we propose a linear-programming based algorithm that efficiently finds a reward function that maximizes action gap and minimizes subjective discount. We test the rewards generated with the algorithm in tabular environments with Q-Learning, and empirically show they lead to faster learning. Although we only focus on Q-Learning because it is perhaps the simplest and most well understood RL algorithm, preliminary results with R-max (Brafman and Tennenholtz, 2000) suggest our results are much more general. Our experiments support three principles of reward design: 1) consistent with existing results, penalizing each step taken induces faster learning than rewarding the goal. 2) When rewarding subgoals along the target trajectory, rewards should gradually increase as the goal gets closer. 3) Dense reward that's nonzero on every state is only good if designed carefully.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.