Paper detail

There is no Accuracy-Interpretability Tradeoff in Reinforcement Learning for Mazes

Interpretability is an essential building block for trustworthiness in reinforcement learning systems. However, interpretability might come at the cost of deteriorated performance, leading many researchers to build complex models. Our goal is to analyze the cost of interpretability. We show that in certain cases, one can achieve policy interpretability while maintaining its optimality. We focus on a classical problem from reinforcement learning: mazes with $k$ obstacles in $\mathbb{R}^d$. We prove the existence of a small decision tree with a linear function at each inner node and depth $O(\log k + 2^d)$ that represents an optimal policy. Note that for the interesting case of a constant $d$, we have $O(\log k)$ depth. Thus, in this setting, there is no accuracy-interpretability tradeoff. To prove this result, we use a new "compressing" technique that might be useful in additional settings.

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.