Final Iteration Convergence Bound of Q-Learning: Switching System Approach
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Q-learning is known as one of the fundamental reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms. Its convergence has been the focus of extensive research over the past several decades. Recently, a new finitetime error bound and analysis for Q-learning was introduced using a switching system framework. This approach views the dynamics of Q-learning as a discrete-time stochastic switching system. The prior study established a finite-time error bound on the averaged iterates using Lyapunov functions, offering further insights into Q-learning. While valuable, the analysis focuses on error bounds of the averaged iterate, which comes with the inherent disadvantages: it necessitates extra averaging steps, which can decelerate the convergence rate. Moreover, the final iterate, being the original format of Q-learning, is more commonly used and is often regarded as a more intuitive and natural form in the majority of iterative algorithms. In this paper, we present a finite-time error bound on the final iterate of Q-learning based on the switching system framework. The proposed error bounds have different features compared to the previous works, and cover different scenarios. Finally, we expect that the proposed results provide additional insights on Q-learning via connections with discrete-time switching systems, and can potentially present a new template for finite-time analysis of more general RL algorithms.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 11 May 2022.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 2; 2025: 2; 2026: 4.
9 papers.
- 2025Understanding the theoretical properties of projected Bellman equation, linear Q-learning, and approximate value iterationcited by 6
- 2022Finite-Time Analysis of Asynchronous Q-learning under Diminishing Step-Size from Control-Theoretic Viewcited by 4
- 2025A Minimal-Assumption Analysis of Q-Learning with Time-Varying Policiescited by 4
- 2024Finite-Time Error Analysis of Soft Q-Learning: Switching System Approachcited by 3
- 2026A Switching System Theory of Q-Learning with Linear Function Approximationcited by 2
- 2026Regret and Sample Complexity of Online Q-Learning via Concentration of Stochastic Approximation with Time-Inhomogeneous Markov Chainscited by 1
- 2026Beyond the Bellman Fixed Point: Geometry and Fast Policy Identification in Value Iterationcited by 1
- 2026Sign-Separated Asymmetric Finite-Time Error Analysis of Q-Learningcited by 1
- 2024Finite-Time Analysis of Simultaneous Double Q-learningcited by 0
- 2026Sign-Separated Asymmetric Finite-Time Error Analysis of Q-Learning15 May 2026
- 2026A Switching System Theory of Q-Learning with Linear Function Approximation10 May 2026
- 2026Beyond the Bellman Fixed Point: Geometry and Fast Policy Identification in Value Iteration19 Apr 2026
- 2026Regret and Sample Complexity of Online Q-Learning via Concentration of Stochastic Approximation with Time-Inhomogeneous Markov Chains18 Feb 2026
- 2025A Minimal-Assumption Analysis of Q-Learning with Time-Varying Policies17 Oct 2025
- 2025Understanding the theoretical properties of projected Bellman equation, linear Q-learning, and approximate value iteration15 Apr 2025
- 2024Finite-Time Analysis of Simultaneous Double Q-learning14 Jun 2024
- 2024Finite-Time Error Analysis of Soft Q-Learning: Switching System Approach11 Mar 2024
- 2022Finite-Time Analysis of Asynchronous Q-learning under Diminishing Step-Size from Control-Theoretic View25 Jul 2022