Paper detail

Understanding the Curse of Horizon in Off-Policy Evaluation via Conditional Importance Sampling

Off-policy policy estimators that use importance sampling (IS) can suffer from high variance in long-horizon domains, and there has been particular excitement over new IS methods that leverage the structure of Markov decision processes. We analyze the variance of the most popular approaches through the viewpoint of conditional Monte Carlo. Surprisingly, we find that in finite horizon MDPs there is no strict variance reduction of per-decision importance sampling or stationary importance sampling, comparing with vanilla importance sampling. We then provide sufficient conditions under which the per-decision or stationary estimators will provably reduce the variance over importance sampling with finite horizons. For the asymptotic (in terms of horizon $T$) case, we develop upper and lower bounds on the variance of those estimators which yields sufficient conditions under which there exists an exponential v.s. polynomial gap between the variance of importance sampling and that of the per-decision or stationary estimators. These results help advance our understanding of if and when new types of IS estimators will improve the accuracy of off-policy estimation.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.