Learning Constrained Markov Decision Processes With Non-stationary Rewards and Constraints

Overview

• The paper explores algorithms for constrained Markov decision processes (CMDPs) with adversarial rewards and constraints.
• It addresses an impossibility result that prevents any algorithm from achieving both sublinear regret and sublinear constraint violation when competing against a best-in-hindsight policy that satisfies constraints on average.
• The paper presents algorithms that can ease this negative result in CMDPs with non-stationary rewards and constraints, where performance degrades smoothly as non-stationarity increases.

Plain English Explanation

In the field of reinforcement learning, researchers often study constrained Markov decision processes (CMDPs). These are decision-making problems where there are not just rewards to maximize, but also constraints that must be satisfied.

The paper tackles a well-known challenge in this area: no algorithm can simultaneously achieve low regret (how much it underperforms the best possible strategy in hindsight) and low constraint violation (how much it violates the constraints) when the rewards and constraints can change adversarially over time.

However, the researchers show that this negative result can be improved if the rewards and constraints are allowed to change in a less extreme way, known as "non-stationary." They present algorithms that can adapt to this type of non-stationarity, where the performance gradually degrades as the environment becomes more unpredictable.

Specifically, the algorithms they develop can achieve regret and constraint violation that scale with the amount of non-stationarity, rather than being forced to perform poorly in the worst case. This represents an important step forward in handling the challenging trade-offs between optimizing performance and satisfying constraints in reinforcement learning.

Technical Explanation

The paper focuses on constrained Markov decision processes (CMDPs) with adversarial rewards and constraints. In this setting, a well-known impossibility result states that no algorithm can simultaneously achieve sublinear regret (i.e., the difference between the algorithm's performance and the best-in-hindsight policy that satisfies constraints on average) and sublinear constraint violation.

To address this, the researchers consider a more general non-stationary setting, where the rewards and constraints can change over time in an adversarial manner. They propose algorithms that can adapt to this non-stationarity, with performance that gracefully degrades as the environment becomes more unpredictable.

Specifically, the researchers develop an algorithm that achieves $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(\sqrt{T} + C)$ regret and positive constraint violation, where $C$ is a measure of the non-stationarity (corruption) in the environment. This can be as high as $\Theta(T)$ in the worst case, which is consistent with the impossibility result for adversarial CMDPs.

First, the researchers design an algorithm with the desired guarantees when the corruption value $C$ is known. Then, they show how to obtain the same results when $C$ is unknown, by embedding the algorithm in a general meta-procedure. This meta-procedure is of independent interest, as it can be applied to any non-stationary constrained online learning setting.

Critical Analysis

The paper makes an important contribution by expanding the possibilities for algorithms in constrained reinforcement learning problems with non-stationary rewards and constraints. By relaxing the strict adversarial setting, the researchers are able to develop algorithms that can adapt to the level of non-stationarity in the environment.

However, the paper does not address the question of how to estimate or bound the corruption value $C$ in practice. While the meta-procedure can handle unknown $C$, it would be useful to have a better understanding of how to quantify the degree of non-stationarity in a given problem.

Additionally, the paper focuses on the theoretical guarantees of the algorithms, but does not provide extensive empirical evaluations. It would be interesting to see how the algorithms perform on realistic non-stationary CMDP benchmarks, and how they compare to other approaches that can handle non-stationarity, such as those explored in this paper or this paper.

Overall, the paper makes a valuable contribution by expanding the theoretical understanding of constrained reinforcement learning in non-stationary environments. Further empirical validation and practical guidance on estimating non-stationarity could help solidify the significance of these results.

Conclusion

This paper addresses a fundamental challenge in constrained Markov decision processes (CMDPs) with adversarial rewards and constraints. It presents algorithms that can ease the negative impossibility result by allowing for non-stationary rewards and constraints, where performance gracefully degrades as the environment becomes more unpredictable.

The key innovation is the development of algorithms that can adapt to the level of non-stationarity, achieving regret and constraint violation that scale with the corruption value $C$, rather than being forced to perform poorly in the worst case. This represents an important step forward in handling the trade-offs between optimization and constraint satisfaction in reinforcement learning, with potential applications in safety-critical domains.

While the theoretical guarantees are promising, further empirical validation and practical guidance on estimating non-stationarity could help solidify the significance of these results and guide their application in real-world settings.