mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Mixing Regularization for Average-Reward Q-Learning and Q-Planning

arXiv 2610.14988 ↗First posted 10 Oct 2026cs.LG cs.AI math.OCcited by 0

On the map: Deep reinforcement learning methods → RL theory and sample complexity

Abstract (arXiv)

The average-reward setting for reinforcement learning is challenging because its Bellman operator is known to contract in span only when the underlying Markov chain is mixing. Whereas existing work typically assumes a contraction property, e.g., through environment mixing, we consider the setting where we are given a reward-agnostic m-step mixing policy, and we control the contraction and exploration properties of the learned policy by regularizing toward the mixing policy. We provide finite-time analysis of Q-learning algorithms that can be instantiated with multiple choices of regularization, with guarantees measured with respect to the regularized fixed point. Our framework exposes novel regularizer-dependent objects that control contraction, exploration, and operator bias. In the one-step setting, our rates match the best known rates for Q-iteration and synchronous Q-learning, and for m-step mixing we derive new rates. We also study Q-planning variants, and show that planning acts as time-localized learning, where the planning horizon H trades off the bias from the boundary value against the sample complexity. Finally, we present numerical studies validating the analysis: (i) knowledge of a strong mixing policy improves convergence and exploration, and its advantage increases with bottleneck severity and, (ii) our theory predicts the convergence and bias rankings of regularizers from the α-divergence family.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in RL theory and sample complexity, one of 15 directions in Deep reinforcement learning methods. First posted on arXiv 10 Oct 2026.

Builds on

0 of 0 references.

No references here yet.

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025From Set Convergence to Pointwise Convergence: Finite-Time Guarantees for Average-Reward Q-Learning with Adaptive Stepsizes
  2. 2026Non-asymptotic Convergence of Average-reward Q-learning with Options
  3. 2026Sample Complexity of Average-Reward Q-Learning: From Single-agent to Federated Reinforcement Learning
  4. 2024Towards Global Optimality for Practical Average Reward Reinforcement Learning without Mixing Time Oracles
  5. 2023LS-IQ: Implicit Reward Regularization for Inverse Reinforcement Learning
  6. 2023A Connection between One-Step Regularization and Critic Regularization in Reinforcement Learning
  7. 2021Comparison and Unification of Three Regularization Methods in Batch Reinforcement Learning
  8. 2026Achieving varepsilon-2 Dependence for Average-Reward Q-Learning with a New Contraction Principle