VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Richard S. Sutton
dblp:48/6070 · also Richard Sutton 0001
· DBLP profile ↗
86ranked-venue papers
26as first author
13since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-3679-3415ORCID · conflict
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 81 · 26 first-author · 12 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 11 · 2 first-author · 1 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 3 · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2Theory of computation · 1 · 1 first-authorApplied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | MetaOptimize: A Framework for Optimizing Step Sizes and Other Meta-parametersabstractWe address the challenge of optimizing meta-parameters (hyperparameters) in machine learning, a key factor for efficient training and high model performance. Rather than relying on expensive meta-parameter search methods, we introduce MetaOptimize: a dynamic approach that adjusts meta-parameters, particularly step sizes (also known as learning rates), during training. More specifically, MetaOptimize can wrap around any first-order optimization algorithm, tuning step sizes on the fly to minimize a specific form of regret that considers the long-term impact of step sizes on training, through a discounted sum of future losses. We also introduce lower-complexity variants of MetaOptimize that, in conjunction with its adaptability to various optimization algorithms, achieve performance comparable to those of the best hand-crafted learning rate schedules across diverse machine learning tasks. Arsalan Sharifnassab, Saber Salehkaleybar, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 3 |
| 2025 | Off-Policy Prediction Learning: An Empirical Study of Online AlgorithmsabstractOff-policy prediction-learning the value function for one policy from data generated while following another policy-is one of the most challenging problems in reinforcement learning. This article makes two main contributions: 1) it empirically studies 11 off-policy prediction learning algorithms with emphasis on their sensitivity to parameters, learning speed, and asymptotic error and 2) based on the empirical results, it proposes two step-size adaptation methods called Step-size Ratchet and Soft Step-size Ratchet that help the algorithm with the lowest error from the experimental study learn faster. Many off-policy prediction learning algorithms have been proposed in the past decade, but it remains unclear which algorithms learn faster than others. In this article, we empirically compare 11 off-policy prediction learning algorithms with linear function approximation on three small tasks: the Collision task, the Rooms task, and the High Variance Rooms task. The Collision task is a small off-policy problem analogous to that of an autonomous car trying to predict whether it will collide with an obstacle. The Rooms and High Variance Rooms tasks are designed such that learning fast in them is challenging. In the Rooms task, the product of importance sampling ratios can be as large as . To control the high variance caused by the product of the importance sampling ratios, step size should be set small, which, in turn, slows down learning. The High Variance Rooms task is more extreme in that the product of the ratios can become as large as . The algorithms considered are Off-policy TD( ), five Gradient-TD algorithms, two Emphatic-TD algorithms, Vtrace, and variants of Tree Backup and ABQ that are applicable to the prediction setting. We found that the algorithms' performance is highly affected by the variance induced by the importance sampling ratios. Tree Backup( ), Vtrace( ), and ABTD( ) are not affected by the high variance as much as other algorithms, but they restrict the effective bootstrapping parameter in a way that is too limiting for tasks where high variance is not present. We observed that Emphatic TD( ) tends to have lower asymptotic error than other algorithms but might learn more slowly in some cases. Based on the empirical results, we propose two step-size adaptation algorithms, which we collectively refer to as the Ratchet algorithms, with the same underlying idea: keep the step-size parameter as large as possible and ratchet it down only when necessary to avoid overshoot. We show that the Ratchet algorithms are effective by comparing them with other popular step-size adaptation algorithms, such as the Adam optimizer. Sina Ghiassian, Banafsheh Rafiee, Richard S. Sutton |
IEEE Trans. Neural Networks Learn. Syst. | 3 |
| 2024 | Reward-Respecting Subtasks for Model-Based Reinforcement Learning (Abstract Reprint)abstractTo achieve the ambitious goals of artificial intelligence, reinforcement learning must include planning with a model of the world that is abstract in state and time. Deep learning has made progress with state abstraction, but temporal abstraction has rarely been used, despite extensively developed theory based on the options framework. One reason for this is that the space of possible options is immense, and the methods previously proposed for option discovery do not take into account how the option models will be used in planning. Options are typically discovered by posing subsidiary tasks, such as reaching a bottleneck state or maximizing the cumulative sum of a sensory signal other than reward. Each subtask is solved to produce an option, and then a model of the option is learned and made available to the planning process. In most previous work, the subtasks ignore the reward on the original problem, whereas we propose subtasks that use the original reward plus a bonus based on a feature of the state at the time the option terminates. We show that option models obtained from such reward-respecting subtasks are much more likely to be useful in planning than eigenoptions, shortest path options based on bottleneck states, or reward-respecting options generated by the option-critic. Reward respecting subtasks strongly constrain the space of options and thereby also provide a partial solution to the problem of option discovery. Finally, we show how values, policies, options, and models can all be learned online and off-policy using standard algorithms and general value functions. Richard S. Sutton, Marlos C. Machado, G. Zacharias Holland, David Szepesvari, Finbarr Timbers, Brian Tanner, Adam White 0001 |
AAAI | 1 |
| 2023 | Toward Efficient Gradient-Based Value EstimationabstractGradient-based methods for value estimation in reinforcement learning have favorable stability properties, but they are typically much slower than Temporal Difference (TD) learning methods. We study the root causes of this slowness and show that Mean Square Bellman Error (MSBE) is an ill-conditioned loss function in the sense that its Hessian has large condition-number. To resolve the adverse effect of poor conditioning of MSBE on gradient based methods, we propose a low complexity batch-free proximal method that approximately follows the Gauss-Newton direction and is asymptotically robust to parameterization. Our main algorithm, called RANS, is efficient in the sense that it is significantly faster than the residual gradient methods while having almost the same computational complexity, and is competitive with TD on the classic problems that we tested. Arsalan Sharifnassab, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 2 |
| 2023 | Reward-respecting subtasks for model-based reinforcement learningabstractTo achieve the ambitious goals of artificial intelligence, reinforcement learning must include planning with a model of the world that is abstract in state and time. Deep learning has made progress with state abstraction, but temporal abstraction has rarely been used, despite extensively developed theory based on the options framework. One reason for this is that the space of possible options is immense, and the methods previously proposed for option discovery do not take into account how the option models will be used in planning. Options are typically discovered by posing subsidiary tasks, such as reaching a bottleneck state or maximizing the cumulative sum of a sensory signal other than reward. Each subtask is solved to produce an option, and then a model of the option is learned and made available to the planning process. In most previous work, the subtasks ignore the reward on the original problem, whereas we propose subtasks that use the original reward plus a bonus based on a feature of the state at the time the option terminates. We show that option models obtained from such reward-respecting subtasks are much more likely to be useful in planning than eigenoptions, shortest path options based on bottleneck states, or reward-respecting options generated by the option-critic. Reward respecting subtasks strongly constrain the space of options and thereby also provide a partial solution to the problem of option discovery. Finally, we show how values, policies, options, and models can all be learned online and off-policy using standard algorithms and general value functions. Richard S. Sutton, Marlos C. Machado, G. Zacharias Holland, David Szepesvari, Finbarr Timbers, Brian Tanner, Adam White 0001 |
Artif. Intell. | 1 |
| 2023 | Scalable Real-Time Recurrent Learning Using Columnar-Constructive NetworksabstractConstructing states from sequences of observations is an important component of reinforcement learning agents. One solution for state construction is to use recurrent neural networks. Back-propagation through time (BPTT), and real-time recurrent learning (RTRL) are two popular gradient-based methods for recurrent learning. BPTT requires complete trajectories of observations before it can compute the gradients and is unsuitable for online updates. RTRL can do online updates but scales poorly to large networks. In this paper, we propose two constraints that make RTRL scalable. We show that by either decomposing the network into independent modules or learning the network in stages, we can make RTRL scale linearly with the number of parameters. Unlike prior scalable gradient estimation algorithms, such as UORO and Truncated-BPTT, our algorithms do not add noise or bias to the gradient estimate. Instead, they trade off the functional capacity of the network for computationally efficient learning. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach over Truncated-BPTT on a prediction benchmark inspired by animal learning and by doing policy evaluation of pre-trained policies for Atari 2600 games. Khurram Javed, Haseeb Shah, Richard S. Sutton, Martha White |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 3 |
| 2023 | Communicative capital: a key resource for human-machine shared agency and collaborative capacityabstractAbstract In this work, we present a perspective on the role machine intelligence can play in supporting human abilities. In particular, we consider research in rehabilitation technologies such as prosthetic devices, as this domain requires tight coupling between human and machine. Taking an agent-based view of such devices, we propose that human–machine collaborations have a capacity to perform tasks which is a result of the combined agency of the human and the machine. We introduce communicative capital as a resource developed by a human and a machine working together in ongoing interactions. Development of this resource enables the partnership to eventually perform tasks at a capacity greater than either individual could achieve alone. We then examine the benefits and challenges of increasing the agency of prostheses by surveying literature which demonstrates that building communicative resources enables more complex, task-directed interactions. The viewpoint developed in this article extends current thinking on how best to support the functional use of increasingly complex prostheses, and establishes insight toward creating more fruitful interactions between humans and supportive, assistive, and augmentative technologies. Kory W. Mathewson, Adam S. R. Parker, Craig Sherstan, Ann L. Edwards, Richard S. Sutton, Patrick M. Pilarski |
Neural Comput. Appl. | 5 |
| 2022 | Doubly-Asynchronous Value Iteration: Making Value Iteration Asynchronous in ActionsabstractValue iteration (VI) is a foundational dynamic programming method, important for learning and planning in optimal control and reinforcement learning. VI proceeds in batches, where the update to the value of each state must be completed before the next batch of updates can begin. Completing a single batch is prohibitively expensive if the state space is large, rendering VI impractical for many applications. Asynchronous VI helps to address the large state space problem by updating one state at a time, in-place and in an arbitrary order. However, Asynchronous VI still requires a maximization over the entire action space, making it impractical for domains with large action space. To address this issue, we propose doubly-asynchronous value iteration (DAVI), a new algorithm that generalizes the idea of asynchrony from states to states and actions. More concretely, DAVI maximizes over a sampled subset of actions that can be of any user-defined size. This simple approach of using sampling to reduce computation maintains similarly appealing theoretical properties to VI without the need to wait for a full sweep through the entire action space in each update. In this paper, we show DAVI converges to the optimal value function with probability one, converges at a near-geometric rate with probability $1-\delta$, and returns a near-optimal policy in computation time that nearly matches a previously established bound for VI. We also empirically demonstrate DAVI's effectiveness in several experiments. Kenny Young, Richard S. Sutton |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2021 | Learning and Planning in Average-Reward Markov Decision ProcessesabstractWe introduce learning and planning algorithms for average-reward MDPs, including 1) the first general proven-convergent off-policy model-free control algorithm without reference states, 2) the first proven-convergent off-policy model-free prediction algorithm, and 3) the first off-policy learning algorithm that converges to the actual value function rather than to the value function plus an offset. All of our algorithms are based on using the temporal-difference error rather than the conventional error when updating the estimate of the average reward. Our proof techniques are a slight generalization of those by Abounadi, Bertsekas, and Borkar (2001). In experiments with an Access-Control Queuing Task, we show some of the difficulties that can arise when using methods that rely on reference states and argue that our new algorithms are significantly easier to use. Yi Wan 0004, Abhishek Naik, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 3 |
| 2021 | Average-Reward Off-Policy Policy Evaluation with Function ApproximationabstractWe consider off-policy policy evaluation with function approximation (FA) in average-reward MDPs, where the goal is to estimate both the reward rate and the differential value function. For this problem, bootstrapping is necessary and, along with off-policy learning and FA, results in the deadly triad (Sutton & Barto, 2018). To address the deadly triad, we propose two novel algorithms, reproducing the celebrated success of Gradient TD algorithms in the average-reward setting. In terms of estimating the differential value function, the algorithms are the first convergent off-policy linear function approximation algorithms. In terms of estimating the reward rate, the algorithms are the first convergent off-policy linear function approximation algorithms that do not require estimating the density ratio. We demonstrate empirically the advantage of the proposed algorithms, as well as their nonlinear variants, over a competitive density-ratio-based approach, in a simple domain as well as challenging robot simulation tasks. Shangtong Zhang, Yi Wan 0004, Richard S. Sutton, Shimon Whiteson |
ICML | 3 |
| 2021 | Average-Reward Learning and Planning with OptionsabstractWe extend the options framework for temporal abstraction in reinforcement learning from discounted Markov decision processes (MDPs) to average-reward MDPs. Our contributions include general convergent off-policy inter-option learning algorithms, intra-option algorithms for learning values and models, as well as sample-based planning variants of our learning algorithms. Our algorithms and convergence proofs extend those recently developed by Wan, Naik, and Sutton. We also extend the notion of option-interrupting behaviour from the discounted to the average-reward formulation. We show the efficacy of the proposed algorithms with experiments on a continuing version of the Four-Room domain. Yi Wan 0004, Abhishek Naik, Richard S. Sutton |
NeurIPS | 3 |
| 2021 | Reward is enoughabstractIn this article we hypothesise that intelligence, and its associated abilities, can be understood as subserving the maximisation of reward. Accordingly, reward is enough to drive behaviour that exhibits abilities studied in natural and artificial intelligence , including knowledge, learning, perception, social intelligence, language, generalisation and imitation. This is in contrast to the view that specialised problem formulations are needed for each ability, based on other signals or objectives. Furthermore, we suggest that agents that learn through trial and error experience to maximise reward could learn behaviour that exhibits most if not all of these abilities, and therefore that powerful reinforcement learning agents could constitute a solution to artificial general intelligence . David Silver 0001, Satinder Singh 0001, Doina Precup, Richard S. Sutton |
Artif. Intell. | 4 |
| 2021 | Looking Back on the Actor-Critic ArchitectureabstractThis retrospective describes the overall research project that gave rise to the authors' paper “Neuronlike adaptive elements that can solve difficult learning control problems” that was published in the 1983 Neural and Sensory Information Processing special issue of the IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. This look back explains how this project came about, presents the ideas and previous publications that influenced it, and describes our most closely related subsequent research. It concludes by pointing out some noteworthy aspects of this article that have been eclipsed by its main contributions, followed by commenting on some of the directions and cautions that should inform future research. Andrew G. Barto, Richard S. Sutton, Charles W. Anderson |
IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. | 2 |
| 2020 | Fixed-Horizon Temporal Difference Methods for Stable Reinforcement LearningabstractWe explore fixed-horizon temporal difference (TD) methods, reinforcement learning algorithms for a new kind of value function that predicts the sum of rewards over a fixed number of future time steps. To learn the value function for horizon h, these algorithms bootstrap from the value function for horizon h−1, or some shorter horizon. Because no value function bootstraps from itself, fixed-horizon methods are immune to the stability problems that plague other off-policy TD methods using function approximation (also known as “the deadly triad”). Although fixed-horizon methods require the storage of additional value functions, this gives the agent additional predictive power, while the added complexity can be substantially reduced via parallel updates, shared weights, and n-step bootstrapping. We show how to use fixed-horizon value functions to solve reinforcement learning problems competitively with methods such as Q-learning that learn conventional value functions. We also prove convergence of fixed-horizon temporal difference methods with linear and general function approximation. Taken together, our results establish fixed-horizon TD methods as a viable new way of avoiding the stability problems of the deadly triad. Kristopher De Asis, Alan Chan 0001, Silviu Pitis, Richard S. Sutton, Daniel Graves |
AAAI | 4 |
| 2020 | Behaviour Suite for Reinforcement Learning
Ian Osband, Yotam Doron, Matteo Hessel, John Aslanides, Eren Sezener, Andre Saraiva 0001, Katrina McKinney, Tor Lattimore, Csaba Szepesvári, Satinder Singh 0001, Benjamin Van Roy, Richard S. Sutton, David Silver 0001, Hado van Hasselt |
ICLR | 12 |
| 2019 | Planning with Expectation ModelsabstractDistribution and sample models are two popular model choices in model-based reinforcement learning (MBRL). However, learning these models can be intractable, particularly when the state and action spaces are large. Expectation models, on the other hand, are relatively easier to learn due to their compactness and have also been widely used for deterministic environments. For stochastic environments, it is not obvious how expectation models can be used for planning as they only partially characterize a distribution. In this paper, we propose a sound way of using approximate expectation models for MBRL. In particular, we 1) show that planning with an expectation model is equivalent to planning with a distribution model if the state value function is linear in state features, 2) analyze two common parametrization choices for approximating the expectation: linear and non-linear expectation models, 3) propose a sound model-based policy evaluation algorithm and present its convergence results, and 4) empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed planning algorithm. Yi Wan 0004, Muhammad Zaheer, Adam White 0001, Martha White, Richard S. Sutton |
IJCAI | 5 |
| 2018 | Multi-Step Reinforcement Learning: A Unifying AlgorithmabstractUnifying seemingly disparate algorithmic ideas to produce better performing algorithms has been a longstanding goal in reinforcement learning. As a primary example, TD(λ) elegantly unifies one-step TD prediction with Monte Carlo methods through the use of eligibility traces and the trace-decay parameter. Currently, there are a multitude of algorithms that can be used to perform TD control, including Sarsa, Q-learning, and Expected Sarsa. These methods are often studied in the one-step case, but they can be extended across multiple time steps to achieve better performance. Each of these algorithms is seemingly distinct, and no one dominates the others for all problems. In this paper, we study a new multi-step action-value algorithm called Q(σ) that unifies and generalizes these existing algorithms, while subsuming them as special cases. A new parameter, σ, is introduced to allow the degree of sampling performed by the algorithm at each step during its backup to be continuously varied, with Sarsa existing at one extreme (full sampling), and Expected Sarsa existing at the other (pure expectation). Q(σ) is generally applicable to both on- and off-policy learning, but in this work we focus on experiments in the on-policy case. Our results show that an intermediate value of σ, which results in a mixture of the existing algorithms, performs better than either extreme. The mixture can also be varied dynamically which can result in even greater performance. Kristopher De Asis, J. Fernando Hernandez-Garcia, G. Zacharias Holland, Richard S. Sutton |
AAAI | 4 |
| 2018 | Per-decision Multi-step Temporal Difference Learning with Control Variates
Kristopher De Asis, Richard S. Sutton |
UAI | 2 |
| 2018 | Comparing Direct and Indirect Temporal-Difference Methods for Estimating the Variance of the Return
Craig Sherstan, Dylan R. Ashley, Brendan Bennett, Kenny Young, Adam White 0001, Martha White, Richard S. Sutton |
UAI | 7 |
| 2018 | On Generalized Bellman Equations and Temporal-Difference LearningabstractWe consider off-policy temporal-difference (TD) learning in discounted Markov decision processes, where the goal is to evaluate a policy in a model-free way by using observations of a state process generated without executing the policy. To curb the high variance issue in off-policy TD learning, we propose a new scheme of setting the $\lambda$-parameters of TD, based on generalized Bellman equations. Our scheme is to set $\lambda$ according to the eligibility trace iterates calculated in TD, thereby easily keeping these traces in a desired bounded range. Compared with prior work, this scheme is more direct and flexible, and allows much larger $\lambda$ values for off-policy TD learning with bounded traces. As to its soundness, using Markov chain theory, we prove the ergodicity of the joint state-trace process under nonrestrictive conditions, and we show that associated with our scheme is a generalized Bellman equation (for the policy to be evaluated) that depends on both the evolution of $\lambda$ and the unique invariant probability measure of the state-trace process. These results not only lead immediately to a characterization of the convergence behavior of least-squares based implementation of our scheme, but also prepare the ground for further analysis of gradient-based implementations. Huizhen Yu, A. Rupam Mahmood, Richard S. Sutton |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 3 |
| 2017 | Crossprop: Learning Representations by Stochastic Meta-Gradient Descent in Neural Networks
Vivek Veeriah, Shangtong Zhang, Richard S. Sutton |
ECML/PKDD (1) | 3 |
| 2016 | True Online Temporal-Difference LearningabstractThe temporal-difference methods TD($\lambda$) and Sarsa($\lambda$) form a core part of modern reinforcement learning. Their appeal comes from their good performance, low computational cost, and their simple interpretation, given by their forward view. Recently, new versions of these methods were introduced, called true online TD($\lambda$) and true online Sarsa($\lambda$), respectively (van Seijen & Sutton, 2014). Algorithmically, these true online methods only make two small changes to the update rules of the regular methods, and the extra computational cost is negligible in most cases. However, they follow the ideas underlying the forward view much more closely. In particular, they maintain an exact equivalence with the forward view at all times, whereas the traditional versions only approximate it for small step-sizes. We hypothesize that these true online methods not only have better theoretical properties, but also dominate the regular methods empirically. In this article, we put this hypothesis to the test by performing an extensive empirical comparison. Specifically, we compare the performance of true online TD($\lambda$)/Sarsa($\lambda$) with regular TD($\lambda$)/Sarsa($\lambda$) on random MRPs, a real-world myoelectric prosthetic arm, and a domain from the Arcade Learning Environment. We use linear function approximation with tabular, binary, and non-binary features. Our results suggest that the true online methods indeed dominate the regular methods. Across all domains/representations the learning speed of the true online methods are often better, but never worse than that of the regular methods. An additional advantage is that no choice between traces has to be made for the true online methods. Besides the empirical results, we provide an in-dept analysis of the theory behind true online temporal-difference learning. In addition, we show that new true online temporal- difference methods can be derived by making changes to the online forward view and then rewriting the update equations. Harm van Seijen, A. Rupam Mahmood, Patrick M. Pilarski, Marlos C. Machado, Richard S. Sutton |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 5 |
| 2016 | An Emphatic Approach to the Problem of Off-policy Temporal-Difference LearningabstractIn this paper we introduce the idea of improving the performance of parametric temporal-difference (TD) learning algorithms by selectively emphasizing or de-emphasizing their updates on different time steps. In particular, we show that varying the emphasis of linear TD($\lambda$)'s updates in a particular way causes its expected update to become stable under off-policy training. The only prior model-free TD methods to achieve this with per- step computation linear in the number of function approximation parameters are the gradient-TD family of methods including TDC, GTD($\lambda$), and GQ$\lambda$). Compared to these methods, our emphatic TD($\lambda$) is simpler and easier to use; it has only one learned parameter vector and one step-size parameter. Our treatment includes general state- dependent discounting and bootstrapping functions, and a way of specifying varying degrees of interest in accurately valuing different states. Richard S. Sutton, A. Rupam Mahmood, Martha White |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 1 |
| 2015 | A Deeper Look at Planning as Learning from ReplayabstractIn reinforcement learning, the notions of experience replay, and of planning as learning from replayed experience, have long been used to find good policies with minimal training data. Replay can be seen either as model-based reinforcement learning, where the store of past experiences serves as the model, or as a way to avoid a conventional model of the environment altogether. In this paper, we look more deeply at how replay blurs the line between model-based and model-free methods. First, we show for the first time an exact equivalence between the sequence of value functions found by a model-based policy-evaluation method and by a model-free method with replay. Second, we present a general replay method that can mimic a spectrum of methods ranging from the explicitly model-free (TD(0)) to the explicitly model-based (linear Dyna). Finally, we use insights gained from these relationships to design a new model-based reinforcement learning algorithm for linear function approximation. This method, which we call forgetful LSTD(lambda), improves upon regular LSTD(lambda) because it extends more naturally to online control, and improves upon linear Dyna because it is a multi-step method, enabling it to perform well even in non-Markov problems or, equivalently, in problems with significant function approximation. Harm Vanseijen, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 2 |
| 2015 | Off-policy learning based on weighted importance sampling with linear computational complexity
A. Rupam Mahmood, Richard S. Sutton |
UAI | 2 |
| 2014 | True Online TD(lambda)abstractTD(lambda) is a core algorithm of modern reinforcement learning. Its appeal comes from its equivalence to a clear and conceptually simple forward view, and the fact that it can be implemented online in an inexpensive manner. However, the equivalence between TD(lambda) and the forward view is exact only for the off-line version of the algorithm (in which updates are made only at the end of each episode). In the online version of TD(lambda) (in which updates are made at each step, which generally performs better and is always used in applications) the match to the forward view is only approximate. In a sense this is unavoidable for the conventional forward view, as it itself presumes that the estimates are unchanging during an episode. In this paper we introduce a new forward view that takes into account the possibility of changing estimates and a new variant of TD(lambda) that exactly achieves it. Our algorithm uses a new form of eligibility trace similar to but different from conventional accumulating and replacing traces. The overall computational complexity is the same as TD(lambda), even when using function approximation. In our empirical comparisons, our algorithm outperformed TD(lambda) in all of its variations. It seems, by adhering more truly to the original goal of TD(lambda)—matching an intuitively clear forward view even in the online case—that we have found a new algorithm that simply improves on classical TD(lambda). Harm van Seijen, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 2 |
| 2014 | A new Q(lambda) with interim forward view and Monte Carlo equivalenceabstractQ-learning, the most popular of reinforcement learning algorithms, has always included an extension to eligibility traces to enable more rapid learning and improved asymptotic performance on non-Markov problems. The lambda parameter smoothly shifts on-policy algorithms such as TD(lambda) and Sarsa(lambda) from a pure bootstrapping form (lambda=0) to a pure Monte Carlo form (lambda=1). In off-policy algorithms, including Q(lambda), GQ(lambda), and off-policy LSTD(lambda), the lambda parameter is intended to play the same role, but does not; on every exploratory action these algorithms bootstrap regardless of the value of lambda, and as a result they fail to approximate Monte Carlo learning when lambda=1. It may seem that this is inevitable for any online off-policy algorithm; if updates are made on each step on which the target policy is followed, then how could just the right updates be ‘un-made’ upon deviation from the target policy? In this paper, we introduce a new version of Q(lambda) that does exactly that, without significantly increased algorithmic complexity. En route to our new Q(lambda), we introduce a new derivation technique based on the forward-view/backward-view analysis familiar from TD(lambda) but extended to apply at every time step rather than only at the end of episodes. We apply this technique to derive first a new off-policy version of TD(lambda), called PTD(lambda), and then our new Q(lambda), called PQ(lambda). Richard S. Sutton, A. Rupam Mahmood, Doina Precup, Hado van Hasselt |
ICML | 1 |
| 2014 | Weighted importance sampling for off-policy learning with linear function approximation
A. Rupam Mahmood, Hado van Hasselt, Richard S. Sutton |
NIPS | 3 |
| 2014 | Universal Option Models
Hengshuai Yao, Csaba Szepesvári, Richard S. Sutton, Joseph Modayil, Shalabh Bhatnagar |
NIPS | 3 |
| 2014 | Off-policy TD( l) with a true online equivalence
Hado van Hasselt, A. Rupam Mahmood, Richard S. Sutton |
UAI | 3 |
| 2013 | Planning by Prioritized Sweeping with Small BackupsabstractEfficient planning plays a crucial role in model-based reinforcement learning. Traditionally, the main planning operation is a full backup based on the current estimates of the successor states. Consequently, its computation time is proportional to the number of successor states. In this paper, we introduce a new planning backup that uses only the current value of a single successor state and has a computation time independent of the number of successor states. This new backup, which we call a small backup, opens the door to a new class of model-based reinforcement learning methods that exhibit much finer control over their planning process than traditional methods. We empirically demonstrate that this increased flexibility allows for more efficient planning by showing that an implementation of prioritized sweeping based on small backups achieves a substantial performance improvement over classical implementations. Harm van Seijen, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML (3) | 2 |
| 2012 | Tuning-free step-size adaptationabstractIncremental learning algorithms based on gradient descent are effective and popular in online supervised learning, reinforcement learning, signal processing, and many other application areas. An oft-noted drawback of these algorithms is that they include a step-size parameter that needs to be tuned for best performance, which may require manual intervention and significant domain knowledge or additional data. In many cases, an entire vector of step-size parameters (e.g., one for each input feature) needs to be tuned in order to attain the best performance of the algorithm. To address this, several methods have been proposed for adapting step sizes online. For example, Sutton's IDBD method can find the best vector step size for the LMS algorithm, and Schraudolph's ELK1 method, an extension of IDBD to neural networks, has proven effective on large applications, such as 3D hand tracking. However, to date all such step-size adaptation methods have included a tunable step-size parameter of their own, which we call the meta-step-size parameter. In this paper we show that the performance of existing step-size adaptation methods are strongly dependent on the choice of their meta-step-size parameter and that their meta-step-size parameter cannot be set reliably in a problem-independent way. We introduce a series of modifications and normalizations to the IDBD method that together eliminate the need to tune the meta-step-size parameter to the particular problem. We show that the resulting overall algorithm, called Autostep, performs as well or better than the existing step-size adaptation methods on a number of idealized and robot prediction problems and does not require any tuning of its meta-step-size parameter. The ideas behind Autostep are not restricted to the IDBD method and the same principles are potentially applicable to other incremental learning settings, such as reinforcement learning. A. Rupam Mahmood, Richard S. Sutton, Thomas Degris, Patrick M. Pilarski |
ICASSP | 2 |
| 2012 | Linear Off-Policy Actor-Critic
Thomas Degris, Martha White, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 3 |
| 2012 | Acquiring a broad range of empirical knowledge in real time by temporal-difference learningabstractSeveral robot capabilities rely on predictions about the temporally extended consequences of a robot's behaviour. We describe how a robot can both learn and make many such predictions in real time using a standard algorithm. Our experiments show that a mobile robot can learn and make thousands of accurate predictions at 10 Hz. The predictions are about the future of all of the robot's sensors and many internal state variables at multiple time-scales. All the predictions share a single set of features and learning parameters. We demonstrate the generality of this method with an application to a different platform, a robot arm operating at 50 Hz. Here, learned predictions can be used to measurably improve the user interface. The temporally extended predictions learned in real time by this method constitute a basic form of knowledge about the dynamics of the robot's interaction with the environment. We also show how this method can be extended to express more general forms of knowledge. Joseph Modayil, Adam White 0001, Patrick M. Pilarski, Richard S. Sutton |
SMC | 4 |
| 2012 | Temporal-difference search in computer Go
David Silver 0001, Richard S. Sutton, Martin Müller 0003 |
Mach. Learn. | 2 |
| 2011 | Beyond Reward: The Problem of Knowledge and Data
Richard S. Sutton |
ILP | 1 |
| 2010 | Toward Off-Policy Learning Control with Function Approximation
Hamid Reza Maei, Csaba Szepesvári, Shalabh Bhatnagar, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 4 |
| 2009 | Fast gradient-descent methods for temporal-difference learning with linear function approximationabstractSutton, Szepesvári and Maei (2009) recently introduced the first temporal-difference learning algorithm compatible with both linear function approximation and off-policy training, and whose complexity scales only linearly in the size of the function approximator. Although their gradient temporal difference (GTD) algorithm converges reliably, it can be very slow compared to conventional linear TD (on on-policy problems where TD is convergent), calling into question its practical utility. In this paper we introduce two new related algorithms with better convergence rates. The first algorithm, GTD2, is derived and proved convergent just as GTD was, but uses a different objective function and converges significantly faster (but still not as fast as conventional TD). The second new algorithm, linear TD with gradient correction, or TDC, uses the same update rule as conventional TD except for an additional term which is initially zero. In our experiments on small test problems and in a Computer Go application with a million features, the learning rate of this algorithm was comparable to that of conventional TD. This algorithm appears to extend linear TD to off-policy learning with no penalty in performance while only doubling computational requirements. Richard S. Sutton, Hamid Reza Maei, Doina Precup, Shalabh Bhatnagar, David Silver 0001, Csaba Szepesvári, Eric Wiewiora |
ICML | 1 |
| 2009 | Convergent Temporal-Difference Learning with Arbitrary Smooth Function ApproximationabstractWe introduce the first temporal-difference learning algorithms that converge with smooth value function approximators, such as neural networks. Conventional temporal-difference (TD) methods, such as TD($\lambda$), Q-learning and Sarsa have been used successfully with function approximation in many applications. However, it is well known that off-policy sampling, as well as nonlinear function approximation, can cause these algorithms to become unstable (i.e., the parameters of the approximator may diverge). Sutton et al (2009a,b) solved the problem of off-policy learning with linear TD algorithms by introducing a new objective function, related to the Bellman-error, and algorithms that perform stochastic gradient-descent on this function. In this paper, we generalize their work to nonlinear function approximation. We present a Bellman error objective function and two gradient-descent TD algorithms that optimize it. We prove the asymptotic almost-sure convergence of both algorithms for any finite Markov decision process and any smooth value function approximator, under usual stochastic approximation conditions. The computational complexity per iteration scales linearly with the number of parameters of the approximator. The algorithms are incremental and are guaranteed to converge to locally optimal solutions. Hamid Reza Maei, Csaba Szepesvári, Shalabh Bhatnagar, Doina Precup, David Silver 0001, Richard S. Sutton |
NIPS | 6 |
| 2009 | Multi-Step Dyna Planning for Policy Evaluation and ControlabstractWe extend Dyna planning architecture for policy evaluation and control in two significant aspects. First, we introduce a multi-step Dyna planning that projects the simulated state/feature many steps into the future. Our multi-step Dyna is based on a multi-step model, which we call the {\em $\lambda$-model}. The $\lambda$-model interpolates between the one-step model and an infinite-step model, and can be learned efficiently online. Second, we use for Dyna control a dynamic multi-step model that is able to predict the results of a sequence of greedy actions and track the optimal policy in the long run. Experimental results show that Dyna using the multi-step model evaluates a policy faster than using single-step models; Dyna control algorithms using the dynamic tracking model are much faster than model-free algorithms; further, multi-step Dyna control algorithms enable the policy and value function to converge much faster to their optima than single-step Dyna algorithms. Hengshuai Yao, Richard S. Sutton, Shalabh Bhatnagar, Dongcui Diao, Csaba Szepesvári |
NIPS | 2 |
| 2008 | Sample-based learning and search with permanent and transient memoriesabstractWe present a reinforcement learning architecture, Dyna-2, that encompasses both sample-based learning and sample-based search, and that generalises across states during both learning and search. We apply Dyna-2 to high performance Computer Go. In this domain the most successful planning methods are based on sample-based search algorithms, such as UCT, in which states are treated individually, and the most successful learning methods are based on temporal-difference learning algorithms, such as Sarsa, in which linear function approximation is used. In both cases, an estimate of the value function is formed, but in the first case it is transient, computed and then discarded after each move, whereas in the second case it is more permanent, slowly accumulating over many moves and games. The idea of Dyna-2 is for the transient planning memory and the permanent learning memory to remain separate, but for both to be based on linear function approximation and both to be updated by Sarsa. To apply Dyna-2 to 9x9 Computer Go, we use a million binary features in the function approximator, based on templates matching small fragments of the board. Using only the transient memory, Dyna-2 performed at least as well as UCT. Using both memories combined, it significantly outperformed UCT. Our program based on Dyna-2 achieved a higher rating on the Computer Go Online Server than any handcrafted or traditional search based program. David Silver 0001, Richard S. Sutton, Martin Müller 0003 |
ICML | 2 |
| 2008 | A computational model of hippocampal function in trace conditioningabstractWe present a new reinforcement-learning model for the role of the hippocampus in classical conditioning, focusing on the differences between trace and delay conditioning. In the model, all stimuli are represented both as unindividuated wholes and as a series of temporal elements with varying delays. These two stimulus representations interact, producing different patterns of learning in trace and delay conditioning. The model proposes that hippocampal lesions eliminate long-latency temporal elements, but preserve short-latency temporal elements. For trace conditioning, with no contiguity between stimulus and reward, these long-latency temporal elements are vital to learning adaptively timed responses. For delay conditioning, in contrast, the continued presence of the stimulus supports conditioned responding, and the short-latency elements suppress responding early in the stimulus. In accord with the empirical data, simulated hippocampal damage impairs trace conditioning, but not delay conditioning, at medium-length intervals. With longer intervals, learning is impaired in both procedures, and, with shorter intervals, in neither. In addition, the model makes novel predictions about the response topography with extended stimuli or post-training lesions. These results demonstrate how temporal contiguity, as in delay conditioning, changes the timing problem faced by animals, rendering it both easier and less susceptible to disruption by hippocampal lesions. Elliot A. Ludvig, Richard S. Sutton, Eric Verbeek 0002, E. James Kehoe |
NIPS | 2 |
| 2008 | A Convergent O(n) Temporal-difference Algorithm for Off-policy Learning with Linear Function ApproximationabstractWe introduce the first temporal-difference learning algorithm that is stable with linear function approximation and off-policy training, for any finite Markov decision process, target policy, and exciting behavior policy, and whose complexity scales linearly in the number of parameters. We consider an i.i.d.\ policy-evaluation setting in which the data need not come from on-policy experience. The gradient temporal-difference (GTD) algorithm estimates the expected update vector of the TD(0) algorithm and performs stochastic gradient descent on its L_2 norm. Our analysis proves that its expected update is in the direction of the gradient, assuring convergence under the usual stochastic approximation conditions to the same least-squares solution as found by the LSTD, but without its quadratic computational complexity. GTD is online and incremental, and does not involve multiplying by products of likelihood ratios as in importance-sampling methods. Richard S. Sutton, Csaba Szepesvári, Hamid Reza Maei |
NIPS | 1 |
| 2008 | Dyna-Style Planning with Linear Function Approximation and Prioritized Sweeping
Richard S. Sutton, Csaba Szepesvári, Alborz Geramifard, Michael H. Bowling |
UAI | 1 |
| 2008 | Stimulus Representation and the Timing of Reward-Prediction Errors in Models of the Dopamine SystemabstractThe phasic firing of dopamine neurons has been theorized to encode a reward-prediction error as formalized by the temporal-difference (TD) algorithm in reinforcement learning. Most TD models of dopamine have assumed a stimulus representation, known as the complete serial compound, in which each moment in a trial is distinctly represented. We introduce a more realistic temporal stimulus representation for the TD model. In our model, all external stimuli, including rewards, spawn a series of internal microstimuli, which grow weaker and more diffuse over time. These microstimuli are used by the TD learning algorithm to generate predictions of future reward. This new stimulus representation injects temporal generalization into the TD model and enhances correspondence between model and data in several experiments, including those when rewards are omitted or received early. This improved fit mostly derives from the absence of large negative errors in the new model, suggesting that dopamine alone can encode the full range of TD errors in these situations. Elliot A. Ludvig, Richard S. Sutton, E. James Kehoe |
Neural Comput. | 2 |
| 2007 | On the role of tracking in stationary environmentsabstractIt is often thought that learning algorithms that track the best solution, as opposed to converging to it, are important only on nonstationary problems. We present three results suggesting that this is not so. First we illustrate in a simple concrete example, the Black and White problem, that tracking can perform better than any converging algorithm on a stationary problem. Second, we show the same point on a larger, more realistic problem, an application of temporal difference learning to computer Go. Our third result suggests that tracking in stationary problems could be important for metalearning research (e.g., learning to learn, feature selection, transfer). We apply a metalearning algorithm for step-size adaptation, IDBD (Sutton, 1992a), to the Black and White problem, showing that meta-learning has a dramatic long-term effect on performance whereas, on an analogous converging problem, meta-learning has only a small second-order effect. This small result suggests a way of eventually overcoming a major obstacle to meta-learning research: the lack of an independent methodology for task selection. Richard S. Sutton, Anna Koop, David Silver 0001 |
ICML | 1 |
| 2007 | Reinforcement Learning of Local Shape in the Game of Go
David Silver 0001, Richard S. Sutton, Martin Müller 0003 |
IJCAI | 2 |
| 2007 | Incremental Natural Actor-Critic AlgorithmsabstractWe present four new reinforcement learning algorithms based on actor-critic and natural-gradient ideas, and provide their convergence proofs. Actor-critic rein- forcement learning methods are online approximations to policy iteration in which the value-function parameters are estimated using temporal difference learning and the policy parameters are updated by stochastic gradient descent. Methods based on policy gradients in this way are of special interest because of their com- patibility with function approximation methods, which are needed to handle large or in(cid:2)nite state spaces. The use of temporal difference learning in this way is of interest because in many applications it dramatically reduces the variance of the gradient estimates. The use of the natural gradient is of interest because it can produce better conditioned parameterizations and has been shown to further re- duce variance in some cases. Our results extend prior two-timescale convergence results for actor-critic methods by Konda and Tsitsiklis by using temporal differ- ence learning in the actor and by incorporating natural gradients, and they extend prior empirical studies of natural actor-critic methods by Peters, Vijayakumar and Schaal by providing the (cid:2)rst convergence proofs and the (cid:2)rst fully incremental algorithms. Shalabh Bhatnagar, Richard S. Sutton, Mohammad Ghavamzadeh |
NIPS | 2 |
| 2006 | Incremental Least-Squares Temporal Difference Learning
Alborz Geramifard, Michael H. Bowling, Richard S. Sutton |
AAAI | 3 |
| 2006 | iLSTD: Eligibility Traces and Convergence AnalysisabstractWe present new theoretical and empirical results with the iLSTD algorithm for policy evaluation in reinforcement learning with linear function approximation. iLSTD is an incremental method for achieving results similar to LSTD, the dataefficient, least-squares version of temporal difference learning, without incurring the full cost of the LSTD computation. LSTD is O(n2 ), where n is the number of parameters in the linear function approximator, while iLSTD is O(n). In this paper, we generalize the previous iLSTD algorithm and present three new results: (1) the first convergence proof for an iLSTD algorithm; (2) an extension to incorporate eligibility traces without changing the asymptotic computational complexity; and (3) the first empirical results with an iLSTD algorithm for a problem (mountain car) with feature vectors large enough (n = 10, 000) to show substantial computational advantages over LSTD. Alborz Geramifard, Michael H. Bowling, Martin Zinkevich, Richard S. Sutton |
NIPS | 4 |
| 2005 | TD(lambda) networks: temporal-difference networks with eligibility tracesabstractTemporal-difference (TD) networks have been introduced as a formalism for expressing and learning grounded world knowledge in a predictive form (Sutton & Tanner, 2005). Like conventional TD(0) methods, the learning algorithm for TD networks uses 1-step backups to train prediction units about future events. In conventional TD learning, the TD(λ) algorithm is often used to do more general multi-step backups of future predictions. In our work, we introduce a generalization of the 1-step TD network specification that is based on the TD(λ) learning algorithm, creating TD(λ) networks. We present experimental results that show TD(λ) networks can learn solutions in more complex environments than TD networks. We also show that in problems that can be solved by TD networks, TD(λ) networks generally learn solutions much faster than their 1-step counterparts. Finally, we present an analysis of our algorithm that shows that the computational cost of TD(λ) networks is only slightly more than that of TD networks. Brian Tanner, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 2 |
| 2005 | Using Predictive Representations to Improve Generalization in Reinforcement Learning
Eddie J. Rafols, Mark B. Ring, Richard S. Sutton, Brian Tanner |
IJCAI | 3 |
| 2005 | Temporal-Difference Networks with History
Brian Tanner, Richard S. Sutton |
IJCAI | 2 |
| 2005 | Off-policy Learning with Options and RecognizersabstractWe introduce a new algorithm for off-policy temporal-difference learning with function approximation that has lower variance and requires less knowledge of the behavior policy than prior methods. We develop the notion of a recognizer, a filter on actions that distorts the behavior policy to produce a related target policy with low-variance importance-sampling corrections. We also consider target policies that are deviations from the state distribution of the behavior policy, such as potential temporally abstract options, which further reduces variance. This paper introduces recognizers and their potential advantages, then develops a full algorithm for linear function approximation and proves that its updates are in the same direction as on-policy TD updates, which implies asymptotic convergence. Even though our algorithm is based on importance sampling, we prove that it requires absolutely no knowledge of the behavior policy for the case of state-aggregation function approximators. Off-policy learning is learning about one way of behaving while actually behaving in another way. For example, Q-learning is an off- policy learning method because it learns about the optimal policy while taking actions in a more exploratory fashion, e.g., according to an -greedy policy. Off-policy learning is of interest because only one way of selecting actions can be used at any time, but we would like to learn about many different ways of behaving from the single resultant stream of experience. For example, the options framework for temporal abstraction involves considering a variety of different ways of selecting actions. For each such option one would like to learn a model of its possible outcomes suitable for planning and other uses. Such option models have been proposed as fundamental building blocks of grounded world knowledge (Sutton, Precup & Singh, 1999; Sutton, Rafols & Koop, 2005). Using off-policy learning, one would be able to learn predictive models for many options at the same time from a single stream of experience. Unfortunately, off-policy learning using temporal-difference methods has proven problematic when used in conjunction with function approximation. Function approximation is essential in order to handle the large state spaces that are inherent in many problem do- mains. Q-learning, for example, has been proven to converge to an optimal policy in the tabular case, but is unsound and may diverge in the case of linear function approximation (Baird, 1996). Precup, Sutton, and Dasgupta (2001) introduced and proved convergence for the first off-policy learning algorithm with linear function approximation. They addressed the problem of learning the expected value of a target policy based on experience generated using a different behavior policy. They used importance sampling techniques to reduce the off-policy case to the on-policy case, where existing convergence theorems apply (Tsitsiklis & Van Roy, 1997; Tadic, 2001). There are two important difficulties with that approach. First, the behavior policy needs to be stationary and known, because it is needed to compute the importance sampling corrections. Second, the importance sampling weights are often ill-conditioned. In the worst case, the variance could be infinite and convergence would not occur. The conditions required to prevent this were somewhat awkward and, even when they applied and asymptotic convergence was assured, the variance could still be high and convergence could be slow. In this paper we address both of these problems in the context of off-policy learning for options. We introduce the notion of a recognizer. Rather than specifying an explicit target policy (for instance, the policy of an option), about which we want to make predictions, a recognizer specifies a condition on the actions that are selected. For example, a recognizer for the temporally extended action of picking up a cup would not specify which hand is to be used, or what the motion should be at all different positions of the cup. The recognizer would recognize a whole variety of directions of motion and poses as part of picking the cup. The advantage of this strategy is not that one might prefer a multitude of different behaviors, but that the behavior may be based on a variety of different strategies, all of which are relevant, and we would like to learn from any of them. In general, a recognizer is a function that recognizes or accepts a space of different ways of behaving and thus, can learn from a wider range of data. Recognizers have two advantages over direct specification of a target policy: 1) they are a natural and easy way to specify a target policy for which importance sampling will be well conditioned, and 2) they do not require the behavior policy to be known. The latter is important because in many cases we may have little knowledge of the behavior policy, or a stationary behavior policy may not even exist. We show that for the case of state aggregation, even if the behavior policy is unknown, convergence to a good model is achieved. 1 Non-sequential example The benefits of using recognizers in off-policy learning can be most easily seen in a nonsequential context with a single continuous action. Suppose you are given a sequence of sample actions ai [0, 1], selected i.i.d. according to probability density b : [0, 1] + (the behavior density). For example, suppose the behavior density is of the oscillatory form shown as a red line in Figure 1. For each each action, ai , we observe a corresponding outcome, zi , a random variable whose distribution depends only on ai . Thus the behavior density induces an outcome density. The on-policy problem is to estimate the mean mb of the outcome density. This problem can be solved simply by averaging the sample outcomes: mb = (1/n) n=1 zi . The off-policy problem is to use this same data to learn what ^ i the mean would be if actions were selected in some way other than b, for example, if the actions were restricted to a designated range, such as between 0.7 and 0.9. There are two natural ways to pose this off-policy problem. The most straightforward way is to be equally interested in all actions within the designated region. One professes to be interested in actions selected according to a target density : [0, 1] + , which in the example would be 5.0 between 0.7 and 0.9, and zero elsewhere, as in the dashed line in 12 Probability density functions Target policy with recognizer Target policy w/o recognizer 1.5 Empirical variances (average of 200 sample variances) 1 without recognizer .5 with recognizer 100 200 300 400 500 Doina Precup, Richard S. Sutton, Cosmin Paduraru, Anna Koop, Satinder Singh 0001 |
NIPS | 2 |
| 2005 | Temporal Abstraction in Temporal-difference NetworksabstractWe present a generalization of temporal-difference networks to include temporally abstract options on the links of the question network. Temporal-difference (TD) networks have been proposed as a way of representing and learning a wide variety of predictions about the interaction between an agent and its environment. These predictions are compositional in that their targets are defined in terms of other predictions, and subjunctive in that that they are about what would happen if an action or sequence of actions were taken. In conventional TD networks, the inter-related predictions are at successive time steps and contingent on a single action; here we generalize them to accommodate extended time intervals and contingency on whole ways of behaving. Our generalization is based on the options framework for temporal abstraction. The primary contribution of this paper is to introduce a new algorithm for intra-option learning in TD networks with function approximation and eligibility traces. We present empirical examples of our algorithm's effectiveness and of the greater representational expressiveness of temporallyabstract TD networks. The primary distinguishing feature of temporal-difference (TD) networks (Sutton & Tanner, 2005) is that they permit a general compositional specification of the goals of learning. The goals of learning are thought of as predictive questions being asked by the agent in the learning problem, such as "What will I see if I step forward and look right?" or "If I open the fridge, will I see a bottle of beer?" Seeing a bottle of beer is of course a complicated perceptual act. It might be thought of as obtaining a set of predictions about what would happen if certain reaching and grasping actions were taken, about what would happen if the bottle were opened and turned upside down, and of what the bottle would look like if viewed from various angles. To predict seeing a bottle of beer is thus to make a prediction about a set of other predictions. The target for the overall prediction is a composition in the mathematical sense of the first prediction with each of the other predictions. TD networks are the first framework for representing the goals of predictive learning in a compositional, machine-accessible form. Each node of a TD network represents an individual question--something to be predicted--and has associated with it a value representing an answer to the question--a prediction of that something. The questions are represented by a set of directed links between nodes. If node 1 is linked to node 2, then node 1 rep- resents a question incorporating node 2's question; its value is a prediction about node 2's prediction. Higher-level predictions can be composed in several ways from lower ones, producing a powerful, structured representation language for the targets of learning. The compositional structure is not just in a human designer's head; it is expressed in the links and thus is accessible to the agent and its learning algorithm. The network of these links is referred to as the question network. An entirely separate set of directed links between the nodes is used to compute the values (predictions, answers) associated with each node. These links collectively are referred to as the answer network. The computation in the answer network is compositional in a conventional way--node values are computed from other node values. The essential insight of TD networks is that the notion of compositionality should apply to questions as well as to answers. A secondary distinguishing feature of TD networks is that the predictions (node values) at each moment in time can be used as a representation of the state of the world at that time. In this way they are an instance of the idea of predictive state representations (PSRs) introduced by Littman, Sutton and Singh (2002), Jaeger (2000), and Rivest and Schapire (1987). Representing a state by its predictions is a potentially powerful strategy for state abstraction (Rafols et al., 2005). We note that the questions used in all previous work with PSRs are defined in terms of concrete actions and observations, not other predictions. They are not compositional in the sense that TD-network questions are. The questions we have discussed so far are subjunctive, meaning that they are conditional on a certain way of behaving. We predict what we would see if we were to step forward and look right, or if we were to open the fridge. The questions in conventional TD networks are subjunctive, but they are conditional only on primitive actions or open-loop sequences of primitive actions (as are conventional PSRs). It is natural to generalize this, as we have in the informal examples above, to questions that are conditional on closed-loop temporally extended ways of behaving. For example, opening the fridge is a complex, high-level action. The arm must be lifted to the door, the hand shaped for grasping the handle, etc. To ask questions like "if I were to go to the coffee room, would I see John?" would require substantial temporal abstraction in addition to state abstraction. The options framework (Sutton, Precup & Singh, 1999) is a straightforward way of talking about temporally extended ways of behaving and about predictions of their outcomes. In this paper we extend the options framework so that it can be applied to TD networks. Significant extensions of the original options framework are needed. Novel features of our option-extended TD networks are that they 1) predict components of option outcomes rather than full outcome probability distributions, 2) learn according to the first intra-option method to use eligibility traces (see Sutton & Barto, 1998), and 3) include the possibility of options whose `policies' are indifferent to which of several actions are selected. 1 The options framework In this section we present the essential elements of the options framework (Sutton, Precup & Singh, 1999) that we will need for our extension of TD networks. In this framework, an agent and an environment interact at discrete time steps t = 1, 2, 3.... In each state st S , the agent selects an action at A, determining the next state st+1 .1 An action is a way of behaving for one time step; the options framework lets us talk about temporally extended ways of behaving. An individual option consists of three parts. The first is the initiation set, I S , the subset of states in which the option can be started. The second component of an option is its policy, : S A [0, 1], specifying how the agent behaves when 1 Although the options framework includes rewards, we omit them here because we are concerned only with prediction, not control. following the option. Finally, a termination function, : S A [0, 1], specifies how the option ends: (s) denotes the probability of terminating when in state s. The option is thus completely and formally defined by the 3-tuple (I , , ). 2 Conventional TD networks In this section we briefly present the details of the structure and the learning algorithm comprising TD networks as introduced by Sutton and Tanner (2005). TD networks address a prediction problem in which the agent may not have direct access to the state of the environment. Instead, at each time step the agent receives an observation ot O dependent on the state. The experience stream thus consists of a sequence of alternating actions and observations, o1 , a1 , o2 , a2 , o3 . The TD network consists of a set of nodes, each representing a single scalar prediction, interlinked by the question and answer networks as suggested previously. For a network 1 n of n nodes, the vector of all predictions at time step t is denoted yt = (yt , . . . , yt )T . The predictions are estimates of the expected value of some scalar quantity, typically of a bit, in which case they can be interpreted as estimates of probabilities. The predictions are updated at each time step according to a vector-valued function u with modifiable parameter W, which is often taken to be of a linear form: yt = u(yt-1 , at-1 , ot , Wt ) = (Wt xt ), (1) where xt m is an m-vector of features created from (yt-1 , at-1 , ot ), Wt is an n m matrix (whose elements are sometimes referred to as weights), and is the n-vector form of either the identity function or the S-shaped logistic function (s) = 1+1 -s . The e feature vector is an arbitrary vector-valued function of yt-1 , at-1 , and ot . For example, in the simplest case the feature vector is a unit basis vector with the location of the one communicating the current state. In a partially observable environment, the feature vector may be a combination of the agent's action, observations, and predictions from the previous time step. The overall update u defines the answer network. The question network consists of a set of target functions, z i : O n , and condition i y functions, ci : A n [0, 1]n . We define zt = z i (ot+1 , ~t+1 ) as the target for prediction i2 i i yt . Similarly, we define ct = c (at , yt ) as the condition at time t. The learning algorithm i for each component wtj of Wt can then be written i zi c yt ij i i wt+1 = wtj + t - yt i , (2) t i wt j where is a positive step-size parameter. Note that the targets here are functions of the observation and predictions exactly one time step later, and that the conditions are functions of a single primitive action. This is what makes this algorithm suitable only for learning about one-step TD relationships. By chaining together multiple nodes, Sutton and Tanner (2005) used it to predict k steps ahead, for various particular values of k , and to predict the outcome of specific action sequences (as in PSRs, e.g., Littman et al., 2002; Singh et al., 2004). Now we consider the extension to temporally abstract actions. 3 Option-extended TD networks In this section we present our intra-option learning algorithm for TD networks with options and eligibility traces. As suggested earlier, each node's outgoing link in the question The quantity ~ is almost the same as y, and we encourage the reader to think of them as identical y here. The difference is that ~ is calculated by weights that are one step out of date as compared to y, y i.e., ~t = u(yt-1 , at-1 , ot , Wt-1 ) (cf. equation 1). y 2 network will now correspond to an option applying over possibly many steps. The policy of the ith node's option corresponds to the condition function ci , which we think of as a recognizer for the option. It inspects each action taken to assess whether the option is being followed: ci = 1 if the agent is acting consistently with the option policy and ci = 0 othert t wise (intermediate values are also possible). When an agent ceases to act consistently with the option policy, we say that the option has diverged. The possibility of recognizing more than one action as consistent with the option is a significant generalization of the original idea of options. If no actions are recognized as acceptable in a state, then the option cannot be followed and thus cannot be initiated. Here we take the set of states with at least one recognized action to be the initiation set of the option. The option-termination function generalizes naturally to TD networks. Each node i is i given a corresponding termination function, i : O n [0, 1], where t = i (ot+1 , yt ) i is the probability of terminating at time t.3 t = 1 indicates that the option has terminated i at time t; t = 0 indicates that it has not, and intermediate values of correspond to soft i or stochastic termination conditions. If an option terminates, then zt acts as the target, but if the option is ongoing without termination, then the node's own next value, yt+1 , should ~i be the target. The termination function specifies which of the two targets (or mixture of the two targets) is used to produce a form of TD error for each node i: i ii ii i t = t zt + (1 - t )yt+1 - yt . ~ (3) Our option-extended algorithm incorporates eligibility traces (see Sutton & Barto, 1998) as short-term memory variables organized in an n m matrix E, paralleling the weight matrix. The traces are a record of the effect that each weight could have had on each node's prediction during the time the agent has been acting consistently with the node's option. The components eij of the eligibility matrix are updated by , i yt ij ij i i (4) et = ct et-1 (1 - t ) + i wt j where 0 1 is the trace-decay parameter familiar from the TD() learning algorithm. Because of the ci factor, all of a node's traces will be immediately reset to zero whenever t the agent deviates from the node's option's policy. If the agent follows the policy and the option does not terminate, then the trace decays by and increments by the gradient in the way typical of eligibility traces. If the policy is followed and the option does terminate, then the trace will be reset to zero on the immediately following time step, and a new trace will start building. Finally, our algorithm updates the weights on each time step by ij i i wt+1 = wtj + t eij . t Richard S. Sutton, Eddie J. Rafols, Anna Koop |
NIPS | 1 |
| 2004 | Temporal-Difference NetworksabstractWe introduce a generalization of temporal-difference (TD) learning to networks of interrelated predictions. Rather than relating a single pre- diction to itself at a later time, as in conventional TD methods, a TD network relates each prediction in a set of predictions to other predic- tions in the set at a later time. TD networks can represent and apply TD learning to a much wider class of predictions than has previously been possible. Using a random-walk example, we show that these networks can be used to learn to predict by a fixed interval, which is not possi- ble with conventional TD methods. Secondly, we show that if the inter- predictive relationships are made conditional on action, then the usual learning-efficiency advantage of TD methods over Monte Carlo (super- vised learning) methods becomes particularly pronounced. Thirdly, we demonstrate that TD networks can learn predictive state representations that enable exact solution of a non-Markov problem. A very broad range of inter-predictive temporal relationships can be expressed in these net- works. Overall we argue that TD networks represent a substantial ex- tension of the abilities of TD methods and bring us closer to the goal of representing world knowledge in entirely predictive, grounded terms. Temporal-difference (TD) learning is widely used in reinforcement learning methods to learn moment-to-moment predictions of total future reward (value functions). In this set- ting, TD learning is often simpler and more data-efficient than other methods. But the idea of TD learning can be used more generally than it is in reinforcement learning. TD learn- ing is a general method for learning predictions whenever multiple predictions are made of the same event over time, value functions being just one example. The most pertinent of the more general uses of TD learning have been in learning models of an environment or task domain (Dayan, 1993; Kaelbling, 1993; Sutton, 1995; Sutton, Precup & Singh, 1999). In these works, TD learning is used to predict future values of many observations or state variables of a dynamical system. The essential idea of TD learning can be described as "learning a guess from a guess". In all previous work, the two guesses involved were predictions of the same quantity at two points in time, for example, of the discounted future reward at successive time steps. In this paper we explore a few of the possibilities that open up when the second guess is allowed to be different from the first. To be more precise, we must make a distinction between the extensive definition of a predic- tion, expressing its desired relationship to measurable data, and its TD definition, express- ing its desired relationship to other predictions. In reinforcement learning, for example, state values are extensively defined as an expectation of the discounted sum of future re- wards, while they are TD defined as the solution to the Bellman equation (a relationship to the expectation of the value of successor states, plus the immediate reward). It's the same prediction, just defined or expressed in different ways. In past work with TD methods, the TD relationship was always between predictions with identical or very similar extensive semantics. In this paper we retain the TD idea of learning predictions based on others, but allow the predictions to have different extensive semantics. 1 The Learning-to-predict Problem The problem we consider in this paper is a general one of learning to predict aspects of the interaction between a decision making agent and its environment. At each of a series of discrete time steps t, the environment generates an observation ot O, and the agent takes an action at A. Whereas A is an arbitrary discrete set, we assume without loss of gener- ality that ot can be represented as a vector of bits. The action and observation events occur in sequence, o1, a1, o2, a2, o3 , with each event of course dependent only on those pre- ceding it. This sequence will be called experience. We are interested in predicting not just each next observation but more general, action-conditional functions of future experience, as discussed in the next section. In this paper we use a random-walk problem with seven states, with left and right actions available in every state: 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 The observation upon arriving in a state consists of a special bit that is 1 only at the two ends of the walk and, in the first two of our three experiments, seven additional bits explicitly indicating the state number (only one of them is 1). This is a continuing task: reaching an end state does not end or interrupt experience. Although the sequence depends determinis- tically on action, we assume that the actions are selected randomly with equal probability so that the overall system can be viewed as a Markov chain. The TD networks introduced in this paper can represent a wide variety of predictions, far more than can be represented by a conventional TD predictor. In this paper we take just a few steps toward more general predictions. In particular, we consider variations of the problem of prediction by a fixed interval. This is one of the simplest cases that cannot otherwise be handled by TD methods. For the seven-state random walk, we will predict the special observation bit some numbers of discrete steps in advance, first unconditionally and then conditioned on action sequences. Richard S. Sutton, Brian Tanner |
NIPS | 1 |
| 2001 | Off-Policy Temporal Difference Learning with Function Approximation
Doina Precup, Richard S. Sutton, Sanjoy Dasgupta |
ICML | 2 |
| 2001 | Scaling Reinforcement Learning toward RoboCup Soccer
Peter Stone 0001, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 2 |
| 2001 | Predictive Representations of StateabstractWe show that states of a dynamical system can be usefully repre(cid:173) sented by multi-step, action-conditional predictions of future ob(cid:173) servations. State representations that are grounded in data in this way may be easier to learn, generalize better, and be less depen(cid:173) dent on accurate prior models than, for example, POMDP state representations. Building on prior work by Jaeger and by Rivest and Schapire, in this paper we compare and contrast a linear spe(cid:173) cialization of the predictive approach with the state representa(cid:173) tions used in POMDPs and in k-order Markov models. Ours is the first specific formulation of the predictive idea that includes both stochasticity and actions (controls). We show that any system has a linear predictive state representation with number of predictions no greater than the number of states in its minimal POMDP model. In predicting or controlling a sequence of observations, the concepts of state and state estimation inevitably arise. There have been two dominant approaches. The generative-model approach, typified by research on partially observable Markov de(cid:173) cision processes (POMDPs), hypothesizes a structure for generating observations and estimates its state and state dynamics. The history-based approach, typified by k-order Markov methods, uses simple functions of past observations as state, that is, as the immediate basis for prediction and control. (The data flow in these two ap(cid:173) proaches are diagrammed in Figure 1.) Of the two, the generative-model approach is more general. The model's internal state gives it temporally unlimited memory(cid:173) the ability to remember an event that happened arbitrarily long ago--whereas a history-based approach can only remember as far back as its history extends. The bane of generative-model approaches is that they are often strongly dependent on a good model of the system's dynamics. Most uses of POMDPs, for example, assume a perfect dynamics model and attempt only to estimate state. There are algorithms for simultaneously estimating state and dynamics (e.g., Chrisman, 1992), analogous to the Baum-Welch algorithm for the uncontrolled case (Baum et al., 1970), but these are only effective at tuning parameters that are already approximately cor(cid:173) rect (e.g., Shatkay & Kaelbling, 1997). observations (and actions) Michael L. Littman, Richard S. Sutton, Satinder Singh 0001 |
NIPS | 2 |
| 2001 | Keepaway Soccer: A Machine Learning Testbed
Peter Stone 0001, Richard S. Sutton |
RoboCup | 2 |
| 2000 | Eligibility Traces for Off-Policy Policy Evaluation
Doina Precup, Richard S. Sutton, Satinder Singh 0001 |
ICML | 2 |
| 2000 | Reinforcement Learning for 3 vs. 2 Keepaway
Peter Stone 0001, Richard S. Sutton, Satinder Singh 0001 |
RoboCup | 2 |
| 1999 | Policy Gradient Methods for Reinforcement Learning with Function Approximation
Richard S. Sutton, David A. McAllester, Satinder Singh 0001, Yishay Mansour |
NIPS | 1 |
| 1999 | Between MDPs and Semi-MDPs: A Framework for Temporal Abstraction in Reinforcement Learning
Richard S. Sutton, Doina Precup, Satinder Singh 0001 |
Artif. Intell. | 1 |
| 1998 | Theoretical Results on Reinforcement Learning with Temporally Abstract Options
Doina Precup, Richard S. Sutton, Satinder Singh 0001 |
ECML | 2 |
| 1998 | Intra-Option Learning about Temporally Abstract Actions
Richard S. Sutton, Doina Precup, Satinder Singh 0001 |
ICML | 1 |
| 1998 | Learning Instance-Independent Value Functions to Enhance Local Search
Robert Moll, Andrew G. Barto, Theodore J. Perkins, Richard S. Sutton |
NIPS | 4 |
| 1998 | Improved Switching among Temporally Abstract Actions
Richard S. Sutton, Satinder Singh 0001, Doina Precup, Balaraman Ravindran |
NIPS | 1 |
| 1998 | Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction
Richard S. Sutton, Andrew G. Barto |
IEEE Trans. Neural Networks | 1 |
| 1997 | On the Significance of Markov Decision Processes
Richard S. Sutton |
ICANN | 1 |
| 1997 | Exponentiated Gradient Methods for Reinforcement Learning
Doina Precup, Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 2 |
| 1997 | Multi-time Models for Temporally Abstract Planning
Doina Precup, Richard S. Sutton |
NIPS | 2 |
| 1996 | Reinforcement Learning with Replacing Eligibility Traces
Satinder Singh 0001, Richard S. Sutton |
Mach. Learn. | 2 |
| 1995 | TD Models: Modeling the World at a Mixture of Time Scales
Richard S. Sutton |
ICML | 1 |
| 1995 | Generalization in Reinforcement Learning: Successful Examples Using Sparse Coarse Coding
Richard S. Sutton |
NIPS | 1 |
| 1993 | Online Learning with Random Representations
Richard S. Sutton, Steven D. Whitehead |
ICML | 1 |
| 1992 | Adapting Bias by Gradient Descent: An Incremental Version of Delta-Bar-Delta
Richard S. Sutton |
AAAI | 1 |
| 1991 | Planning by Incremental Dynamic Programming
Richard S. Sutton |
ML | 1 |
| 1991 | Learning Polynomial Functions by Feature Construction
Richard S. Sutton, Christopher J. Matheus |
ML | 1 |
| 1991 | Iterative Construction of Sparse Polynomial Approximations
Terence D. Sanger, Richard S. Sutton, Christopher J. Matheus |
NIPS | 2 |
| 1990 | Integrated Architectures for Learning, Planning, and Reacting Based on Approximating Dynamic Programming
Richard S. Sutton |
ML | 1 |
| 1990 | Integrated Modeling and Control Based on Reinforcement Learning
Richard S. Sutton |
NIPS | 1 |
| 1989 | Sequential Decision Probelms and Neural Networks
Andrew G. Barto, Richard S. Sutton, Christopher J. C. H. Watkins |
NIPS | 2 |
| 1988 | Learning to Predict by the Methods of Temporal Differences
Richard S. Sutton |
Mach. Learn. | 1 |
| 1985 | Training and Tracking in Robotics
Oliver G. Selfridge, Richard S. Sutton, Andrew G. Barto |
IJCAI | 2 |
| 1983 | Neuronlike adaptive elements that can solve difficult learning control problemsabstractIt is shown how a system consisting of two neuronlike adaptive elements can solve a difficult learning control problem. The task is to balance a pole that is hinged to a movable cart by applying forces to the cart's base. It is argued that the learning problems faced by adaptive elements that are components of adaptive networks are at least as difficult as this version of the pole-balancing problem. The learning system consists of a single associative search element (ASE) and a single adaptive critic element (ACE). In the course of learning to balance the pole, the ASE constructs associations between input and output by searching under the influence of reinforcement feedback, and the ACE constructs a more informative evaluation function than reinforcement feedback alone can provide. The differences between this approach and other attempts to solve problems using neurolike elements are discussed, as is the relation of this work to classical and instrumental conditioning in animal learning studies and its possible implications for research in the neurosciences. Andrew G. Barto, Richard S. Sutton, Charles W. Anderson |
IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. | 2 |