mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Which Model to Trust: Assessing the Influence of Models on the Performance of Reinforcement Learning Algorithms for Continuous Control Tasks

arXiv 2110.13079 ↗First posted 25 Oct 2021cs.LG stat.MLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The need for algorithms able to solve Reinforcement Learning (RL) problems with few trials has motivated the advent of model-based RL methods. The reported performance of model-based algorithms has dramatically increased within recent years. However, it is not clear how much of the recent progress is due to improved algorithms or due to improved models. While different modeling options are available to choose from when applying a model-based approach, the distinguishing traits and particular strengths of different models are not clear. The main contribution of this work lies precisely in assessing the model influence on the performance of RL algorithms. A set of commonly adopted models is established for the purpose of model comparison. These include Neural Networks (NNs), ensembles of NNs, two different approximations of Bayesian NNs (BNNs), that is, the Concrete Dropout NN and the Anchored Ensembling, and Gaussian Processes (GPs). The model comparison is evaluated on a suite of continuous control benchmarking tasks. Our results reveal that significant differences in model performance do exist. The Concrete Dropout NN reports persistently superior performance. We summarize these differences for the benefit of the modeler and suggest that the model choice is tailored to the standards required by each specific application.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Oct 2021.

Builds on

21 of 39 references.

References · 21

  1. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
  2. 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,888
  3. 2015Continuous control with deep reinforcement learningcited by 3,279
  4. 2017What Uncertainties Do We Need in Bayesian Deep Learning for Computer Vision?cited by 2,335
  5. 2016OpenAI Gymcited by 1,684
  6. 2019When to Trust Your Model: Model-Based Policy Optimizationcited by 753
  7. 2018Deep Reinforcement Learning in a Handful of Trials using Probabilistic Dynamics Modelscited by 748
  8. 2016Unifying Count-Based Exploration and Intrinsic Motivationcited by 632
  9. 2017A Brief Survey of Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 466
  10. 2017Deep Reinforcement Learning: An Overviewcited by 327
  11. 2017Neural Network Dynamics for Model-Based Deep Reinforcement Learning with Model-Free Fine-Tuningcited by 288
  12. 2017Concrete Dropoutcited by 227
9 more
  1. 2019Deep Dynamics Models for Learning Dexterous Manipulationcited by 200
  2. 2019Benchmarking Model-Based Reinforcement Learningcited by 158
  3. 2015Why M Heads are Better than One: Training a Diverse Ensemble of Deep Networkscited by 138
  4. 2018Model-Based Reinforcement Learning via Meta-Policy Optimizationcited by 99
  5. 2015Gaussian Processes for Data-Efficient Learning in Robotics and Controlcited by 97
  6. 2018Uncertainty in Neural Networks: Approximately Bayesian Ensemblingcited by 94
  7. 2017Reproducibility of Benchmarked Deep Reinforcement Learning Tasks for Continuous Controlcited by 92
  8. 2018Efficient Exploration through Bayesian Deep Q-Networkscited by 67
  9. 2021Model-based micro-data reinforcement learning: what are the crucial model properties and which model to choose?cited by 11

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 1.

3 papers.