atlas

Research map / Reinforcement learning / Offline RL

Improving Offline RL by Blending Heuristics

ICLR 2024 · Reinforcement learning › Offline RL · approach: Pessimism and uncertainty in offline RL · 1 citations (OpenAlex)

Read the paperCheck your idea against 108,967 papers

AI-extracted summary. Written by AI from the paper's full text. Numbers and claims can be wrong or missing context, so check the paper before you cite or build on it.

Proposes Heuristic Blending (HUBL), which relabels offline datasets by blending Monte-Carlo return heuristics into rewards and shrinking discounts, improving four bootstrapping-based offline RL methods by about 9% on 27 D4RL and Meta-World datasets, with a finite-sample analysis.

Problem

Bootstrapping-based model-free offline RL methods perform inconsistently across datasets, sometimes underperforming behavior cloning, due to errors from bootstrapping and function approximation with limited data.

Approach

Relabel offline data with rewards r + gamma*lambda*h and discount gamma*(1-lambda), where h is the Monte-Carlo return of the behavior policy and lambda is a trajectory-dependent blending factor (large for high-return trajectories), so the base offline RL algorithm relies less on bootstrapping where the behavior policy performs well; theory frames this as a reshaped MDP with a bias-regret trade-off

Key results

Measured effects reported in the paper

What was changedWhereMeasuredEffect
Add reward relabeling to discount-only rank blending (ablation)ATAC · 27 datasets, averagerelative improvement: -0.02 -> 0.02Helped
Add reward relabeling to discount-only rank blending (ablation)CQL · 27 datasets, averagerelative improvement: 0.04 -> 0.16Helped
Add reward relabeling to discount-only rank blending (ablation)IQL · 27 datasets, averagerelative improvement: -0.04 -> 0.09Helped
Add reward relabeling to discount-only rank blending (ablation)TD3+BC · 27 datasets, averagerelative improvement: -0.03 -> 0.09Helped
Use rank blending instead of sigmoid or constant blendingHUBL · 108 cases across 27 datasets and 4 base methodswins: 30 vs 46 vs 32Helped

Surprising findings

Limitations

Experimental setup

Datasets: D4RL Meta-World

Benchmarks: D4RL Meta-World

Metrics: relative normalized score improvement normalized score

Baselines: CQL TD3+BC IQL ATAC discount regularization behavior cloning

Builds on: CQL TD3+BC IQL ATAC VI-LCB

Closest papers by meaning

Writing a paper in this area? scime draft is a free LaTeX editor with AI included, real-time co-authors and a check of your references and venue rules before you submit. It also imports OpenAI Prism projects.

Open scime draft

Get the next scime Dispatch and a monthly field update

Free. We send a confirmation link first; every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Privacy