mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Lazy-MDPs: Towards Interpretable Reinforcement Learning by Learning When to Act

arXiv 2203.08542 ↗First posted 16 Mar 2022cs.LG cs.AIcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Traditionally, Reinforcement Learning (RL) aims at deciding how to act optimally for an artificial agent. We argue that deciding when to act is equally important. As humans, we drift from default, instinctive or memorized behaviors to focused, thought-out behaviors when required by the situation. To enhance RL agents with this aptitude, we propose to augment the standard Markov Decision Process and make a new mode of action available: being lazy, which defers decision-making to a default policy. In addition, we penalize non-lazy actions in order to encourage minimal effort and have agents focus on critical decisions only. We name the resulting formalism lazy-MDPs. We study the theoretical properties of lazy-MDPs, expressing value functions and characterizing optimal solutions. Then we empirically demonstrate that policies learned in lazy-MDPs generally come with a form of interpretability: by construction, they show us the states where the agent takes control over the default policy. We deem those states and corresponding actions important since they explain the difference in performance between the default and the new, lazy policy. With suboptimal policies as default (pretrained or random), we observe that agents are able to get competitive performance in Atari games while only taking control in a limited subset of states.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 27 of its 50 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Mar 2022.

Builds on

27 of 50 references.

References · 27

  1. 2015Dueling Network Architectures for Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 769
  2. 2016Unifying Count-Based Exploration and Intrinsic Motivationcited by 632
  3. 2016The Option-Critic Architecturecited by 433
  4. 2019A Theory of Regularized Markov Decision Processescited by 279
  5. 2018Residual Reinforcement Learning for Robot Controlcited by 242
  6. 2018Programmatically Interpretable Reinforcement Learningcited by 192
  7. 2019Efficient Exploration via State Marginal Matchingcited by 186
  8. 2017A unified view of entropy-regularized Markov decision processescited by 174
  9. 2018RUDDER: Return Decomposition for Delayed Rewardscited by 162
  10. 2018Residual Policy Learningcited by 146
  11. 2017Visualizing and Understanding Atari Agentscited by 141
  12. 2018Self-Imitation Learningcited by 135
15 more
  1. 2018Dopamine: A Research Framework for Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 121
  2. 2019Hindsight Credit Assignmentcited by 74
  3. 2016Graying the black box: Understanding DQNscited by 68
  4. 2018Toward Interpretable Deep Reinforcement Learning with Linear Model U-Treescited by 65
  5. 2021The Option Keyboard: Combining Skills in Reinforcement Learningcited by 65
  6. 2020Counterfactual Credit Assignment in Model-Free Reinforcement Learningcited by 60
  7. 2018Optimizing Agent Behavior over Long Time Scales by Transporting Valuecited by 57
  8. 2021Concave Utility Reinforcement Learning: the Mean-Field Game Viewpointcited by 54
  9. 2019Explain Your Move: Understanding Agent Actions Using Specific and Relevant Feature Attributioncited by 50
  10. 2015Increasing the Action Gap: New Operators for Reinforcement Learningcited by 49
  11. 2019Generation of Policy-Level Explanations for Reinforcement Learningcited by 37
  12. 2020Leverage the Average: an Analysis of KL Regularization in RLcited by 33
  13. 2021Synthetic Returns for Long-Term Credit Assignmentcited by 27
  14. 2020Self-Imitation Advantage Learningcited by 15
  15. 2019Continuous-Time Markov Decision Processes with Controlled Observationscited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

7 papers.