Can Temporal-Difference and Q-Learning Learn Representation? A Mean-Field Theory
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Temporal-difference and Q-learning play a key role in deep reinforcement learning, where they are empowered by expressive nonlinear function approximators such as neural networks. At the core of their empirical successes is the learned feature representation, which embeds rich observations, e.g., images and texts, into the latent space that encodes semantic structures. Meanwhile, the evolution of such a feature representation is crucial to the convergence of temporal-difference and Q-learning. In particular, temporal-difference learning converges when the function approximator is linear in a feature representation, which is fixed throughout learning, and possibly diverges otherwise. We aim to answer the following questions: When the function approximator is a neural network, how does the associated feature representation evolve? If it converges, does it converge to the optimal one? We prove that, utilizing an overparameterized two-layer neural network, temporal-difference and Q-learning globally minimize the mean-squared projected Bellman error at a sublinear rate. Moreover, the associated feature representation converges to the optimal one, generalizing the previous analysis of Cai et al. (2019) in the neural tangent kernel regime, where the associated feature representation stabilizes at the initial one. The key to our analysis is a mean-field perspective, which connects the evolution of a finite-dimensional parameter to its limiting counterpart over an infinite-dimensional Wasserstein space. Our analysis generalizes to soft Q-learning, which is further connected to policy gradient.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 8 Jun 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 1; 2023: 3; 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
7 papers.
- 2022When Should We Prefer Offline Reinforcement Learning Over Behavioral Cloning?cited by 86
- 2023Offline RL with Observation Histories: Analyzing and Improving Sample Complexitycited by 7
- 2021Wasserstein Flow Meets Replicator Dynamics: A Mean-Field Analysis of Representation Learning in Actor-Criticcited by 5
- 2023The RL Perceptron: Generalisation Dynamics of Policy Learning in High Dimensionscited by 5
- 2023Towards a Better Understanding of Representation Dynamics under TD-learningcited by 3
- 2024A Mean-Field Analysis of Neural Stochastic Gradient Descent-Ascent for Functional Minimax Optimizationcited by 1
- 2026Beyond the Independence Assumption: Finite-Sample Guarantees for Deep Q-Learning under τ-Mixingcited by 0
- 2026Beyond the Independence Assumption: Finite-Sample Guarantees for Deep Q-Learning under τ-Mixing7 May 2026
- 2024A Mean-Field Analysis of Neural Stochastic Gradient Descent-Ascent for Functional Minimax Optimization18 Apr 2024
- 2023Offline RL with Observation Histories: Analyzing and Improving Sample Complexity31 Oct 2023
- 2023The RL Perceptron: Generalisation Dynamics of Policy Learning in High Dimensions17 Jun 2023
- 2023Towards a Better Understanding of Representation Dynamics under TD-learning29 May 2023
- 2022When Should We Prefer Offline Reinforcement Learning Over Behavioral Cloning?12 Apr 2022
- 2021Wasserstein Flow Meets Replicator Dynamics: A Mean-Field Analysis of Representation Learning in Actor-Critic27 Dec 2021