Olya Mastikhina

Olya Mastikhina, Dhruv Sreenivas, Pablo Samuel Castro

Actor-critic methods have been central to many of the recent advances in deep reinforcement learning. The most common approach is to use symmetric architectures, whereby both actor and critic have the same network topology and number of parameters. However, recent works have argued for the advantages of asymmetric setups, specifically with the use of smaller actors. We perform broad empirical investigations and analyses to better understand the implications of this and find that, in general, smaller actors result in performance degradation and overfit critics. Our analyses suggest poor data collection, due to value underestimation, as one of the main causes for this behavior, and further highlight the crucial role the critic can play in alleviating this pathology. We explore techniques to mitigate the observed value underestimation, which enables further research in asymmetric actor-critic methods.

Golnaz Mesbahi, Parham Mohammad Panahi, Olya Mastikhina et al.

In continual RL we want agents capable of never-ending learning, and yet our evaluation methodologies do not reflect this. The standard practice in RL is to assume unfettered access to the deployment environment for the full lifetime of the agent. For example, agent designers select the best performing hyperparameters in Atari by testing each for 200 million frames and then reporting results on 200 million frames. In this position paper, we argue and demonstrate the pitfalls of this inappropriate empirical methodology: lifetime tuning. We provide empirical evidence to support our position by testing DQN and SAC across several of continuing and non-stationary environments with two main findings: (1) lifetime tuning does not allow us to identify algorithms that work well for continual learning -- all algorithms equally succeed; (2) recently developed continual RL algorithms outperform standard non-continual algorithms when tuning is limited to a fraction of the agent's lifetime. The goal of this paper is to provide an explanation for why recent progress in continual RL has been mixed and motivate the development of empirical practices that better match the goals of continual RL.