mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Hardness in Markov Decision Processes: Theory and Practice

arXiv 2210.13075 ↗First posted 24 Oct 2022cs.LGcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Meticulously analysing the empirical strengths and weaknesses of reinforcement learning methods in hard (challenging) environments is essential to inspire innovations and assess progress in the field. In tabular reinforcement learning, there is no well-established standard selection of environments to conduct such analysis, which is partially due to the lack of a widespread understanding of the rich theory of hardness of environments. The goal of this paper is to unlock the practical usefulness of this theory through four main contributions. First, we present a systematic survey of the theory of hardness, which also identifies promising research directions. Second, we introduce Colosseum, a pioneering package that enables empirical hardness analysis and implements a principled benchmark composed of environments that are diverse with respect to different measures of hardness. Third, we present an empirical analysis that provides new insights into computable measures. Finally, we benchmark five tabular agents in our newly proposed benchmark. While advancing the theoretical understanding of hardness in non-tabular reinforcement learning remains essential, our contributions in the tabular setting are intended as solid steps towards a principled non-tabular benchmark. Accordingly, we benchmark four agents in non-tabular versions of Colosseum environments, obtaining results that demonstrate the generality of tabular hardness measures.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Oct 2022.

Builds on

14 of 43 references.

References · 14

  1. 2019Dota 2 with Large Scale Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 1,084
  2. 2018Is Q-learning Provably Efficient?cited by 485
  3. 2013(More) Efficient Reinforcement Learning via Posterior Samplingcited by 233
  4. 2019Tighter Problem-Dependent Regret Bounds in Reinforcement Learning without Domain Knowledge using Value Function Boundscited by 194
  5. 2019Provably efficient RL with Rich Observations via Latent State Decodingcited by 169
  6. 2017Deep Exploration via Randomized Value Functionscited by 155
  7. 2019Behaviour Suite for Reinforcement Learningcited by 129
  8. 2019Kinematic State Abstraction and Provably Efficient Rich-Observation Reinforcement Learningcited by 114
  9. 2015Sample Complexity of Episodic Fixed-Horizon Reinforcement Learningcited by 105
  10. 2019Non-Asymptotic Gap-Dependent Regret Bounds for Tabular MDPscited by 104
  11. 2019Model-free Reinforcement Learning in Infinite-horizon Average-reward Markov Decision Processescited by 81
  12. 2021Beyond No Regret: Instance-Dependent PAC Reinforcement Learningcited by 41
2 more
  1. 2017Posterior sampling for reinforcement learning: worst-case regret boundscited by 28
  2. 2019Estimating the Mixing Time of Ergodic Markov Chainscited by 24

Built on by

Cited by year

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

3 papers.