Abstract

Despite the empirical success of meta reinforcement learning (meta-RL), there are still a number poorly-understood discrepancies between theory and practice. Critically, biased gradient estimates are almost always implemented in practice, whereas prior theory on meta-RL only establishes convergence under unbiased gradient estimates. In this work, we investigate such a discrepancy. In particular, (1) We show that unbiased gradient estimates have variance \(\Theta(N)\) which linearly depends on the sample size \(N\) of the inner loop updates; (2) We propose linearized score function (LSF) gradient estimates, which have bias \(\mathcal\{O\}(1/\sqrt\{N\})\) and variance \(\mathcal\{O\}(1/N)\); (3) We show that most empirical prior work in fact implements variants of the LSF gradient estimates. This implies that practical algorithms "accidentally" introduce bias to achieve better performance; (4) We establish theoretical guarantees for the LSF gradient estimates in meta-RL regarding its con

Authors

(none)

Tags

  • Meta-RL
  • Policy Gradient

Stats

  • citations0
  • S2 citationsβ€”
  • github stars0
  • HF likes0
  • heat score0.00
  • arxiv keytang2021biased

Related papers