In plain words: They tested several reward bonuses that push a game-playing agent to try new things, keeping the learning algorithm fixed so only the bonuses were compared. None beat simple random exploration on the hardest games, and the bonuses often made play worse on easy games.
Abstract
This paper provides an empirical evaluation of recently developed exploration algorithms within the Arcade Learning Environment (ALE). We study the use of different reward bonuses that incentives exploration in reinforcement learning. We do so by fixing the learning algorithm used and focusing only on the impact of the different exploration bonuses in the agent's performance. We use Rainbow, the state-of-the-art algorithm for value-based agents, and focus on some of the bonuses proposed in the last few years. We consider the impact these algorithms have on performance within the popular game Montezuma's Revenge which has gathered a lot of interest from the exploration community, across the the set of seven games identified by Bellemare et al. (2016) as challenging for exploration, and easier games where exploration is not an issue. We find that, in our setting, recently developed bonuses do not provide significantly improved performance on Montezuma's Revenge or hard exploration games. We also find that existing bonus-based methods may negatively impact performance on games in which exploration is not an issue and may even perform worse than $ε$-greedy exploration.
Adrien Ali Taïga, William Fedus, Marlos C. Machado, Aaron Courville, Marc G. Bellemare
arXiv:1908.02388 · cs.LG, stat.ML · submitted Aug 6, 2019 · updated Sep 24, 2021
abstract · pdf · html · Accepted at the second Exploration in Reinforcement Learning Workshop at the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning, Long Beach, California. The full version arxiv.org/abs/2109.11052 was published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020