Detecting Rewards Deterioration in Episodic Reinforcement Learning
Open accessAbstract
In many RL applications, once training ends, it is vital to detect any deterioration in the agent performance as soon as possible. Furthermore, it often has to be done without modifying the policy and under minimal assumptions regarding the environment. In this paper, we address this problem by focusing directly on the rewards and testing for degradation. We consider an episodic framework, where the rewards within each episode are not independent, nor identically-distributed, nor Markov. We present this problem as a multivariate mean-shift detection problem with possibly partial observations. We define the mean-shift in a way corresponding to deterioration of a temporal signal (such as the rewards), and derive a test for this problem with optimal statistical power. Empirically, on deteriorated rewards in control problems (generated using various environment modifications), the test is demonstrated to be more powerful than standard tests - often by orders of magnitude. We also suggest a novel Bootstrap mechanism for False Alarm Rate control (BFAR), applicable to episodic (non-i.i.d) signal and allowing our test to run sequentially in an online manner. Our method does not rely on a learned model of the environment, is entirely external to the agent, and in fact can be applied to detect changes or drifts in any episodic signal.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Some methods using reward signal deterioration to detect novelty can be dangerous in high-stakes environments where it may be too late to recover, and may incorrectly map the novelty causing reward shift.
“Some methods attempt to use a measure of reward signal deterioration as a way to detect if a novelty has occurred, but that can prove to be dangerous in a high stakes environment where it may be too late to recover from a negative signal (Greenberg & Mannor, 2020).This method may also prove to have an incorrect mapping of the novelty that caused the reward shift.”
From Novelty Detection in Reinforcement Learning with World Models (2023) · cites this paper as Greenberg & Mannor, 2020
The Introduction (p. 1) describes detecting reward deterioration after environmental changes and stresses that critical failures must be detected quickly in risk-intolerant applications. It does not say that reward-based detection is itself dangerous because recovery may already be too late, or that it incorrectly identifies the novelty responsible for a reward shift. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Part of this paper’s reference list could not be split into single entries.
Deep Reinforcement Learning That Matters
Henderson, P., Islam, R., Bachman, P., Pineau, J., Precup, D., & Meger, D. (2018) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v32i1.11694 · Cited by 1,685 · see citing works
Cheng, R., Orosz, G., Murray, R. M., & Burdick, J. W. (2019) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33013387 · Cited by 611 · see citing works
Combined Shewhart-Cusum control chart for improved quality control in clinical chemistry
Westgard, J. O., Groth, T., Aronsson, T., & de Verdier, C. H. (1977) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1093/clinchem/23.10.1881 · Cited by 138 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- [2]2. Ditzler, G., Polikar, R., and Alippi, C. Learning in nonstationary environments: A survey. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine , 2015.
- [4]4. Efron, B. Second thoughts on the bootstrap. Statist. Sci. , 18(2):135-140, 05 2003. doi: 10.1214/ss/ 1063994968. URL https://doi.org/10.1214/ ss/1063994968 . · DOI
- [6]6. Garcia, J. and Fernandez, F. A comprehensive survey on safe reinforcement learning. JMLR , 2015.
- [7]7. Garivier, A. and Moulines, E. On upper-confidence bound policies for switching bandit problems. International Conference on Algorithmic Learning Theory , pp. 174188, 10 2011. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-24412-4 16. · DOI
- [9]9. Gupta, A., Koren, T., and Talwar, K. Better algorithms for stochastic bandits with adversarial corruptions. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research , 2019.
- [10]10. Harel, M., Crammer, K., El-Yaniv, R., and Mannor, S. Concept drift detection through resampling. International Conference on Machine Learning , pp. II-1009-II-1017, 2014.
- [13]13. Hessel, M., Modayil, J., van Hasselt, H., Schaul, T., Ostrovski, G., Dabney, W., Horgan, D., Piot, B., Azar, M., and Silver, D. Rainbow: Combining improvements in deep reinforcement learning. AAAI , 2018.
- [14]14. Hotelling, H. The generalization of student's ratio. Ann. Math. Statist. , 2(3):360-378, 08 1931. doi: 10.1214/ aoms/1177732979. URL https://doi.org/10. 1214/aoms/1177732979 .
- [16]16. Jun, K.-S. et al. Adversarial attacks on stochastic bandits. NeurIPS , 2018.
- [17]17. Junges, S. et al. Safety-constrained reinforcement learning for mdps. International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems , 2016. - K. V. Mardia, J. T. K. and Bibby, J. M. Multivariate analysis . Academic Press, 1979.
- [19]19. Kharitonov, E., Vorobev, A., Macdonald, C., Serdyukov, P., and Ounis, I. Sequential testing for early stopping of online experiments. Proceedings of the 38th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval , pp. 473-482, 2015. doi: 10.1145/2766462.2767729. URL https://doi. org/10.1145/2766462.2767729 . · DOI
- [22]22. Kroese, D. P., Brereton, T., Taimre, T., and Botev, Z. Why the monte carlo method is so important today. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics , 6: 386-392, 2014.
- [23]23. Kuncheva, L. I. Change detection in streaming multivariate data using likelihood detectors. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering , 25(5):1175-1180, 2013. doi: 10.1109/TKDE.2011.226. · DOI
- [25]25. Lecarpentier, E. and Rachelson, E. Non-stationary markov decision processes: a worst-case approach using model-based reinforcement learning. NeurIPS 2019 , abs/1904.10090, 2019. URL http://arxiv.org/ abs/1904.10090 . · arXiv
- [26]26. Lee, K. et al. Context-aware dynamics model for generalization in model-based rl. ICML , 2020.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Novelty Detection in Reinforcement Learning with World Models
Zollicoffer, G., Eaton, K., Balloch, J., Kim, J., Zhou, W., Wright, R., & Riedl, M. O. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.08731
- Authors
- Greenberg, I., & Mannor, S.
- Affiliations
- Technion – Israel Institute of Technology (IL)
- ORCID
- Mannor, Shie
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2020
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2010.11660
- OpenAlex
- W3172156273
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Israel Science Foundation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Advanced Statistical Process Monitoring
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Advanced Bandit Algorithms Research
- Keywords
- episodic reinforcement learning, change point detection, mean shift detection, partial observability, drift detection
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
