Pruning Cannot Hurt Robustness: Certified Trade-offs in Reinforcement Learning
This addresses robustness and efficiency issues in reinforcement learning for real-world deployment, offering a novel theoretical and empirical framework.
The paper tackles the problem of ensuring reinforcement learning policies remain robust to adversarial perturbations while being over-parameterized, proving that element-wise pruning can only tighten certified robustness bounds and empirically showing it improves robustness without harming clean performance at moderate sparsity levels.
Reinforcement learning (RL) policies deployed in real-world environments must remain reliable under adversarial perturbations. At the same time, modern deep RL agents are heavily over-parameterized, raising costs and fragility concerns. While pruning has been shown to improve robustness in supervised learning, its role in adversarial RL remains poorly understood. We develop the first theoretical framework for certified robustness under pruning in state-adversarial Markov decision processes (SA-MDPs). For Gaussian and categorical policies with Lipschitz networks, we prove that element-wise pruning can only tighten certified robustness bounds; pruning never makes the policy less robust. Building on this, we derive a novel three-term regret decomposition that disentangles clean-task performance, pruning-induced performance loss, and robustness gains, exposing a fundamental performance--robustness frontier. Empirically, we evaluate magnitude and micro-pruning schedules on continuous-control benchmarks with strong policy-aware adversaries. Across tasks, pruning consistently uncovers reproducible ``sweet spots'' at moderate sparsity levels, where robustness improves substantially without harming - and sometimes even enhancing - clean performance. These results position pruning not merely as a compression tool but as a structural intervention for robust RL.