The Formalism-Implementation Gap in Reinforcement Learning Research
This addresses a methodological gap in RL research that affects researchers and practitioners by advocating for more foundational work over incremental performance gains.
The paper argues that reinforcement learning research should shift from focusing solely on agent performance to advancing scientific understanding and improving benchmark precision, using the Arcade Learning Environment as an example to facilitate real-world deployment.
The last decade has seen an upswing in interest and adoption of reinforcement learning (RL) techniques, in large part due to its demonstrated capabilities at performing certain tasks at "super-human levels". This has incentivized the community to prioritize research that demonstrates RL agent performance, often at the expense of research aimed at understanding their learning dynamics. Performance-focused research runs the risk of overfitting on academic benchmarks -- thereby rendering them less useful -- which can make it difficult to transfer proposed techniques to novel problems. Further, it implicitly diminishes work that does not push the performance-frontier, but aims at improving our understanding of these techniques. This paper argues two points: (i) RL research should stop focusing solely on demonstrating agent capabilities, and focus more on advancing the science and understanding of reinforcement learning; and (ii) we need to be more precise on how our benchmarks map to the underlying mathematical formalisms. We use the popular Arcade Learning Environment (ALE; Bellemare et al., 2013) as an example of a benchmark that, despite being increasingly considered "saturated", can be effectively used for developing this understanding, and facilitating the deployment of RL techniques in impactful real-world problems.