Trajectory-Aware Eligibility Traces for Off-Policy Reinforcement Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Off-policy learning from multistep returns is crucial for sample-efficient reinforcement learning, but counteracting off-policy bias without exacerbating variance is challenging. Classically, off-policy bias is corrected in a per-decision manner: past temporal-difference errors are re-weighted by the instantaneous Importance Sampling (IS) ratio after each action via eligibility traces. Many off-policy algorithms rely on this mechanism, along with differing protocols for cutting the IS ratios to combat the variance of the IS estimator. Unfortunately, once a trace has been fully cut, the effect cannot be reversed. This has led to the development of credit-assignment strategies that account for multiple past experiences at a time. These trajectory-aware methods have not been extensively analyzed, and their theoretical justification remains uncertain. In this paper, we propose a multistep operator that can express both per-decision and trajectory-aware methods. We prove convergence conditions for our operator in the tabular setting, establishing the first guarantees for several existing methods as well as many new ones. Finally, we introduce Recency-Bounded Importance Sampling (RBIS), which leverages trajectory awareness to perform robustly across λ-values in an off-policy control task.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jan 2023.
Builds on
9 of 28 references.
References · 9
- 2016Safe and Efficient Off-Policy Reinforcement Learningcited by 264
- 2016Sample Efficient Actor-Critic with Experience Replaycited by 188
- 2016Q(λ) with Off-Policy Correctionscited by 48
- 2021A Generalized Projected Bellman Error for Off-policy Value Estimation in Reinforcement Learningcited by 26
- 2019Adaptive Trade-Offs in Off-Policy Learningcited by 20
- 2017Multi-step Off-policy Learning Without Importance Sampling Ratioscited by 19
- 2021Revisiting Peng's Q(λ) for Modern Reinforcement Learningcited by 19
- 2017Convergent Tree Backup and Retrace with Function Approximationcited by 11
- 2017On Generalized Bellman Equations and Temporal-Difference Learningcited by 8
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 0; 2026: 4.
6 papers.
- 2024Averaging n-step Returns Reduces Variance in Reinforcement Learningcited by 9
- 2024Demystifying the Recency Heuristic in Temporal-Difference Learningcited by 4
- 2026Value Bonuses using Ensemble Errors for Exploration in Reinforcement Learningcited by 1
- 2026Peng's Q(λ) for Conservative Value Estimation in Offline Reinforcement Learningcited by 0
- 2026Gated Q-learning: Add Off-Policy Bias to Tastecited by 0
- 2026When Does External Guidance Help LLM Reasoning? A Bias-Variance Theory of Guidance-Augmented GRPOcited by 0
- 2026Gated Q-learning: Add Off-Policy Bias to Taste31 Jul 2026
- 2026When Does External Guidance Help LLM Reasoning? A Bias-Variance Theory of Guidance-Augmented GRPO8 Jul 2026
- 2026Peng's Q(λ) for Conservative Value Estimation in Offline Reinforcement Learning14 May 2026
- 2026Value Bonuses using Ensemble Errors for Exploration in Reinforcement Learning12 Feb 2026
- 2024Demystifying the Recency Heuristic in Temporal-Difference Learning18 Jun 2024
- 2024Averaging n-step Returns Reduces Variance in Reinforcement Learning6 Feb 2024