AdaStop: adaptive statistical testing for sound comparisons of Deep RL agents
Open accessAbstract
Recently, the scientific community has questioned the statistical reproducibility of many empirical results, especially in the field of machine learning. To contribute to the resolution of this reproducibility crisis, we propose a theoretically sound methodology for comparing the performance of a set of algorithms. We exemplify our methodology in Deep Reinforcement Learning (Deep RL). The performance of one execution of a Deep RL algorithm is a random variable. Therefore, several independent executions are needed to evaluate its performance. When comparing algorithms with random performance, a major question concerns the number of executions to perform to ensure that the result of the comparison is theoretically sound. Researchers in Deep RL often use less than 5 independent executions to compare algorithms: we claim that this is not enough in general. Moreover, when comparing more than 2 algorithms at once, we have to use a multiple tests procedure to preserve low error guarantees. We introduce AdaStop, a new statistical test based on multiple group sequential tests. When used to compare algorithms, AdaStop adapts the number of executions to stop as early as possible while ensuring that enough information has been collected to distinguish algorithms that have different score distributions. We prove theoretically that AdaStop has a low probability of making a (family-wise) error. We illustrate the effectiveness of AdaStop in various use-cases, including toy examples and Deep RL algorithms on challenging Mujoco environments. AdaStop is the first statistical test fitted to this sort of comparisons: it is both a significant contribution to statistics, and an important contribution to computational studies performed in reinforcement learning and in other domains.
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?
The closest work uses sequential testing to stabilize performance estimates in reinforcement learning algorithms, where multiple runs with different seeds are required for statistical significance.
“The closest work to ours uses sequential testing to stabilize performance estimates in reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms, where multiple runs with different seeds are required for statistical significance (Mathieu et al., 2023).”
From Stop Guessing When to Stop Testing: Efficient Model Evaluation with Just Enough Data (2026) · cites this paper as Mathieu et al., 2023
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
Research works printed but not linked: 38
- Rishabh Agarwal, Max Schwarzer, Pablo Samuel Castro, Aaron C Courville, and Marc Bellemare. Deep reinforcement learning at the edge of the statistical precipice. Advances in neural information processing systems, 34:29304-29320, 2021.
- Marc G Bellemare, Yavar Naddaf, Joel Veness, and Michael Bowling. The arcade learning environment: An evaluation platform for general agents. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 47:253-279, 2013.
- EunYi Chung and Joseph P. Romano. Exact and asymptotically robust permutation tests. The An- nals of Statistics, 41(2):484 -507, 2013. doi: 10.1214/13-AOS1090. URL https://doi.org/10.1214/ 13-AOS1090. · DOI
- Cédric Colas, Olivier Sigaud, and Pierre-Yves Oudeyer. How many random seeds? statistical power analysis in deep reinforcement learning experiments. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.08295, 2018. · arXiv
- Cédric Colas, Olivier Sigaud, and Pierre-Yves Oudeyer. A hitchhiker's guide to statistical comparisons of reinforcement learning algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.06979, 2019. · arXiv
- Geoff Cumming and Sue Finch. Inference by eye: confidence intervals and how to read pictures of data. American psychologist, 60(2):170, 2005.
- Carlo D'Eramo, Davide Tateo, Andrea Bonarini, Marcello Restelli, and Jan Peters. Mushroomrl: Simplifying reinforcement learning research. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 22(131):1-5, 2021. URL http: //jmlr.org/papers/v22/18-056.html.
- Logan Engstrom, Andrew Ilyas, Shibani Santurkar, Dimitris Tsipras, Firdaus Janoos, Larry Rudolph, and Aleksander Madry. Implementation matters in deep policy gradients: A case study on PPO and TRPO. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.12729, 2020. · arXiv
- Ronald Aylmer Fisher. Design of experiments. British Medical Journal, 1(3923):554, 1936.
- Yannis Flet-Berliac, Reda Ouhamma, Odalric-Ambrym Maillard, and Philippe Preux. Learning value func- tions in deep policy gradients using residual variance. In ICLR 2021-International Conference on Learning Representations, 2021.
- Steven N Goodman, Daniele Fanelli, and John PA Ioannidis. What does research reproducibility mean? Science translational medicine, 8(341):341ps12-341ps12, 2016.
- KK Gordon Lan and David L DeMets. Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials. Biometrika, 70(3): 659-663, 1983.
- Tuomas Haarnoja, Aurick Zhou, Pieter Abbeel, and Sergey Levine. Soft actor-critic: Off-policy maximum entropy deep reinforcement learning with a stochastic actor. In International conference on machine learning, pp. 1861-1870. PMLR, 2018.
- Steven R. Howard, Aaditya Ramdas, Jon McAuliffe, and Jasjeet Sekhon. Time-uniform, nonparametric, nonasymptotic confidence sequences. The Annals of Statistics, 49(2):1055 -1080, 2021. doi: 10.1214/ 20-AOS1991. URL https://doi.org/10.1214/20-AOS1991. · DOI · Paper page
- Shengyi Huang, Rousslan Fernand Julien Dossa, Chang Ye, Jeff Braga, Dipam Chakraborty, Kinal Mehta, and João G.M. Araújo. Cleanrl: High-quality single-file implementations of deep reinforcement learning algorithms. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 23(274):1-18, 2022. URL http://jmlr.org/papers/ v23/21-1342.html.
- Christopher Jennison and Bruce W Turnbull. Group sequential methods with applications to clinical trials. CRC Press, 1999.
- Emilie Kaufmann and Wouter M Koolen. Mixture martingales revisited with applications to sequential tests and confidence intervals. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 22(1):11140-11183, 2021.
- Ilmun Kim, Sivaraman Balakrishnan, and Larry Wasserman. Minimax optimality of permutation tests. The Annals of Statistics, 50(1):225 -251, 2022. doi: 10.1214/21-AOS2103. URL https://doi.org/10.1214/ 21-AOS2103. · DOI
- D. Knuth. The art of programming, volume 1, Fundamental Algorithms. Addison-Wesley, 1968.
- Tor Lattimore and Csaba Szepesvári. Bandit algorithms. Cambridge University Press, 2020.
- Erich Leo Lehmann, Joseph P Romano, and George Casella. Testing statistical hypotheses, volume 3. Springer, 2005.
- Les Leventhal and Cam-Loi Huynh. Directional decisions for two-tailed tests: Power, error rates, and sample size. Psychological Methods, 1(3):278, 1996.
- Timothy P Lillicrap, Jonathan J Hunt, Alexander Pritzel, Nicolas Heess, Tom Erez, Yuval Tassa, David Silver, and Daan Wierstra. Continuous control with deep reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1509.02971, 2015. · arXiv
- John Ludbrook and Hugh Dudley. Why permutation tests are superior to t and f tests in biomedical research. The American Statistician, 52(2):127-132, 1998.
- Cyrus R Mehta, Nitin Patel, Pralay Senchaudhuri, and Anastasios Tsiatis. Exact permutational tests for group sequential clinical trials. Biometrics, pp. 1042-1053, 1994.
- Sandro Pampallona and Anastasios A Tsiatis. Group sequential designs for one-sided and two-sided hypoth- esis testing with provision for early stopping in favor of the null hypothesis. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 42(1-2):19-35, 1994.
- Belinda Phipson and Gordon K Smyth. Permutation p-values should never be zero: calculating exact p- values when permutations are randomly drawn. Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology, 9(1), 2010.
- Edwin JG Pitman. Significance tests which may be applied to samples from any populations. Supplement to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 4(1):119-130, 1937.
- Stuart J Pocock. Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials. Biometrika, 64(2): 191-199, 1977.
- Antonin Raffin, Ashley Hill, Adam Gleave, Anssi Kanervisto, Maximilian Ernestus, and Noah Dormann. Stable-baselines3: Reliable reinforcement learning implementations. Journal of Machine Learning Re- search, 22(268):1-8, 2021. URL http://jmlr.org/papers/v22/20-1364.html.
- Joseph P Romano. Bootstrap and randomization tests of some nonparametric hypotheses. The Annals of Statistics, 17(1):141-159, 1989.
- Joseph P. Romano and Michael Wolf. Exact and approximate stepdown methods for multiple hypothesis testing. SSRN Journal Electronic Journal, 2003. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.563267. URL https://doi.org/10. 2139%2Fssrn.563267. · DOI
- John Schulman, Sergey Levine, Pieter Abbeel, Michael Jordan, and Philipp Moritz. Trust region policy optimization. In International conference on machine learning, pp. 1889-1897. PMLR, 2015.
- John Schulman, Filip Wolski, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alec Radford, and Oleg Klimov. Proximal policy optimiza- tion algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347, 2017. · arXiv
- Connie P Shapiro and Lawrence Hubert. Asymptotic normality of permutation statistics derived from weighted sums of bivariate functions. The Annals of Statistics, 7(4):788-794, 1979.
- Jaehyeok Shin, Aaditya Ramdas, and Alessandro Rinaldo. Nonparametric iterated-logarithm extensions of the sequential generalized likelihood ratio test. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Information Theory, 2 (2):691-704, 2021.
- Emanuel Todorov, Tom Erez, and Yuval Tassa. Mujoco: A physics engine for model-based control. In 2012 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp. 5026-5033. IEEE, 2012.
- A. Wald. Sequential Tests of Statistical Hypotheses. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 16(2):117 -186, 1945. doi: 10.1214/aoms/1177731118. URL https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177731118. · DOI
- Authors
- Mathieu, T., Della Vecchia, R., Shilova, A., Centa, M. M., Kohler, H., Maillard, O.-A., & Preux, P.
- Affiliations
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2306.10882
- OpenAlex
- W4381568519
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- LillOA (Université de Lille (University Of Lille)) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Université de Lille
- Agence Nationale de la Recherche
- CHIST-ERA
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Simulation Techniques and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Probability and Statistical Research
- Keywords
- hypothesis testing, deep reinforcement learning, algorithm comparison, family-wise error rate, statistical reproducibility, early stopping
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