Performance Dynamics and Termination Errors in Reinforcement Learning: A Unifying Perspective

In reinforcement learning, a decision needs to be made at some point as to whether it is worthwhile to carry on with the learning process or to terminate it. In many such situations, stochastic elements are often present which govern the occurrence of rewards, with the sequential occurrences of positive rewards randomly interleaved with negative rewards. For most practical learners, the learning is considered useful if the number of positive rewards always exceeds the negative ones. A situation that often calls for learning termination is when the number of negative rewards exceeds the number of positive rewards. However, while this seems reasonable, the error of premature termination, whereby termination is enacted along with the conclusion of learning failure despite the positive rewards eventually far outnumber the negative ones, can be significant. In this paper, using combinatorial analysis we study the error probability in wrongly terminating a reinforcement learning activity which undermines the effectiveness of an optimal policy, and we show that the resultant error can be quite high. Whilst we demonstrate mathematically that such errors can never be eliminated, we propose some practical mechanisms that can effectively reduce such errors. Simulation experiments have been carried out, the results of which are in close agreement with our theoretical findings.Comment: Short Paper in AIKE 201

Stochastic Reinforcement Learning

In reinforcement learning episodes, the rewards and punishments are often non-deterministic, and there are invariably stochastic elements governing the underlying situation. Such stochastic elements are often numerous and cannot be known in advance, and they have a tendency to obscure the underlying rewards and punishments patterns. Indeed, if stochastic elements were absent, the same outcome would occur every time and the learning problems involved could be greatly simplified. In addition, in most practical situations, the cost of an observation to receive either a reward or punishment can be significant, and one would wish to arrive at the correct learning conclusion by incurring minimum cost. In this paper, we present a stochastic approach to reinforcement learning which explicitly models the variability present in the learning environment and the cost of observation. Criteria and rules for learning success are quantitatively analyzed, and probabilities of exceeding the observation cost bounds are also obtained.Comment: AIKE 201

Statistical and Computational Trade-offs in Variational Inference: A Case Study in Inferential Model Selection

Variational inference has recently emerged as a popular alternative to the classical Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) in large-scale Bayesian inference. The core idea of variational inference is to trade statistical accuracy for computational efficiency. It aims to approximate the posterior, reducing computation costs but potentially compromising its statistical accuracy. In this work, we study this statistical and computational trade-off in variational inference via a case study in inferential model selection. Focusing on Gaussian inferential models (a.k.a. variational approximating families) with diagonal plus low-rank precision matrices, we initiate a theoretical study of the trade-offs in two aspects, Bayesian posterior inference error and frequentist uncertainty quantification error. From the Bayesian posterior inference perspective, we characterize the error of the variational posterior relative to the exact posterior. We prove that, given a fixed computation budget, a lower-rank inferential model produces variational posteriors with a higher statistical approximation error, but a lower computational error; it reduces variances in stochastic optimization and, in turn, accelerates convergence. From the frequentist uncertainty quantification perspective, we consider the precision matrix of the variational posterior as an uncertainty estimate. We find that, relative to the true asymptotic precision, the variational approximation suffers from an additional statistical error originating from the sampling uncertainty of the data. Moreover, this statistical error becomes the dominant factor as the computation budget increases. As a consequence, for small datasets, the inferential model need not be full-rank to achieve optimal estimation error. We finally demonstrate these statistical and computational trade-offs inference across empirical studies, corroborating the theoretical findings.Comment: 56 pages, 8 figure