###Benchmarking Deep Reinforcement Learning for Continuous Control
Yan Duan, Xi Chen, Rein Houthooft, John Schulman, Pieter Abbeel


The article is dedicated to implementation and comparison of a range of reinforcement learning algorithms. Benchmarks and algorithms gould be found at https://github.com/ rllab/rllab. Authors showed that even some implemented batch algorithms could provide an effective solutions for training DNN. Nevertheless, none of them are able to cope with more complicated, hierarchical tasks.

Tasks

Basic

Cart-Pole Balancing, Cart-Pole Swing Up, Mountain Car, Acrobot Swing Up, Double Inverted Pendulum Balancing

Locomotion Tasks

Six tasks (such. as Swimmer, Walker), for which the main goal is to move forward as quickly as possible.

Partially Observable Tasks

  • Limited Sensors: only positional information is provided. An agent is to learn to infer velocity information in order to recover the full state.
  • Noisy Observations and Delayed Actions: adding Gaussian noise to the observations.
  • System Identification: the underlying physical model parameters are varied across episodes, so agent has to generilize.

Result : recurrent policies can find better solutions than feedforward policies, but they are more difficult to train.

Hierarchical Tasks

  • Locomotion + Food Collection
  • Locomotion + Maze Result : all of implemented algorithms achieve poor performance, even with extensive hyperparameter search and 500 iterations of training.

Algorithms

Batch Algorithms

  • REINFORCE estimates the gradient of expected return:

, where and b is a policy baseline, that reduces varience.

Result fast and effective, but prone to converging to local optima.

  • Truncated Natural Policy Gradient (TNPG) It adds computation of the ascent direction provides a small change in a policy distribution.

.

The step is choosen as : Then authors replace ∇θη(πθ) and I(θ) by their empirical estimates.

Result Outperforms other batch algorithms on most tasks.

  • Reward-Weighted Regression (RWR) RWR allows to avoid manual setting of learning rate. Each iteration algorithm optimizes a lower bound of the log-expected return with argmax of . Where

, where p is a function that transforms raw returns to nonnegative value.

Result RWR showed fast initial improvement followed by significant slow-down. It can solve only basic tasks.

  • Relative Entropy Policy Search (REPS) The aim is to lessen the loss of information per iteration. At each iteration all trajectories are collected and then argmin of dual parameters are found to maximize information for updated parameters.

Result REPS is prone to early convergence to local optima in case of continuous states and actions

  • Trust Region Policy Optimization (TRPO) The algorithm is similar to TNPG, but adds surrogate loss which leads to more precise control of the expected policy improvment. Detailed description of the algorithm could be found at [Schulman, J., Levine, S., Abbeel, P., Jordan, M. I., and Moritz, P. Trust region policy optimization. In ICML, pp. 1889–1897, 2015a].

Result Outperform other batch algorithms on most tasks along with TNPG.

  • Cross Entropy Method (CEM) CEM explores directly in the policy parameter space, opposed to learning via stochastic actions. For that at each step i. N pertrubations of policy parameter are produced; ii new iteration performed; iii the top q-quantile parameters are used to compute the mean and a new covariance matrix.

Result CEM suffers from increasing complicity of system dynamics. Moreover, in high-dimensional observation tasks it runs out of memory.

  • Covariance Matrix Adaption Evolution Strategy (CMA-ES) Similar to CEM, but estimates the covariance matrix using information about the corelations between consecutive updates.

Online Algorithms

Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient (DDPG) The algorithm improves the policy during environment exploration. For stability issues two target networks are used: critic NN and the policy NN. Authors applie gradient descent to the policy within a minibatch from a replay pool; then The critic is trained via gradient descent on the l2 loss of the Bellman error.

Result converges significantly faster on certain tasks due to its greater sample efficiency, but less stable, than batch algorithms. However, he latter problem could be solved by rescaling the reward of all tasks by a factor of 0.1.

Recurrent Variants

All aforementioned algorithms were implemented as recurrent policies.