mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Less is more? Rewards in RL for Cyber Defence

arXiv 2503.03245 ↗First posted 5 Mar 2025cs.LG cs.AI cs.CRcited by 1

On the map: Deep reinforcement learning methods → Adversarial robustness and RL in finance

Abstract (arXiv)

The last few years have seen an explosion of interest in autonomous cyber defence agents based on deep reinforcement learning. Such agents are typically trained in a cyber gym environment, also known as a cyber simulator, at least 32 of which have already been built. Most, if not all cyber gyms provide dense "scaffolded" reward functions which combine many penalties or incentives for a range of (un)desirable states and costly actions. Whilst dense rewards help alleviate the challenge of exploring complex environments, yielding seemingly effective strategies from relatively few environment steps; they are also known to bias the solutions an agent can find, potentially towards suboptimal solutions. This is especially a problem in complex cyber environments where policy weaknesses may not be noticed until exploited by an adversary. In this work we set out to evaluate whether sparse reward functions might enable training more effective cyber defence agents. Towards this goal we first break down several evaluation limitations in existing work by proposing a ground truth evaluation score that goes beyond the standard RL paradigm used to train and evaluate agents. By adapting a well-established cyber gym to accommodate our methodology and ground truth score, we propose and evaluate two sparse reward mechanisms and compare them with a typical dense reward. Our evaluation considers a range of network sizes, from 2 to 50 nodes, and both reactive and proactive defensive actions. Our results show that sparse rewards, particularly positive reinforcement for an uncompromised network state, enable the training of more effective cyber defence agents. Furthermore, we show that sparse rewards provide more stable training than dense rewards, and that both effectiveness and training stability are robust to a variety of cyber environment considerations.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Adversarial robustness and RL in finance, one of 15 directions in Deep reinforcement learning methods. Builds on 5 of its 6 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Mar 2025.

Builds on

5 of 6 references.

References · 5

  1. 2018Learning by Playing - Solving Sparse Reward Tasks from Scratchcited by 167
  2. 2019Measuring the Reliability of Reinforcement Learning Algorithmscited by 51
  3. 2022Developing Optimal Causal Cyber-Defence Agents via Cyber Security Simulationcited by 37
  4. 2023On Autonomous Agents in a Cyber Defence Environmentcited by 26
  5. 2023Reward Shaping for Happier Autonomous Cyber Security Agentscited by 19

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Beyond Rewards in Reinforcement Learning for Cyber Defence
  2. 2025Large Language Model-Based Reward Design for Deep Reinforcement Learning-Driven Autonomous Cyber Defense
  3. 2026Trident : How to Break Deep Reinforcement Learning Cyber Defenses (Agentic)
  4. 2026SoK: The Pitfalls of Deep Reinforcement Learning for Cybersecurity
  5. 2026Distilling Knowledge from Large Language Models into Lightweight Reinforcement Learning Agents for Autonomous Cyber Operations
  6. 2025An Empirical Game-Theoretic Analysis of Autonomous Cyber-Defence Agents
  7. 2026Ask the Expert: LLM-Guided Reinforcement Learning for Autonomous Cyber Defense
  8. 2024Hierarchical Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning for Cyber Network Defense