Exploring and Exploiting Markovia (Notes on Reinforcement Learning)

[ deep-learning  reinforcement-learning  machine-learning  udacity  ]

Better know your history, right? Not if you’re Markovian. In Markovia, everyone is blackout drunk and stumbling around. Nobody remembers anything. History doesn’t matter.

These drunkards aren’t just any ol’ drunkards: they are stochastic processes.
A stochastic process is said to have the Markovian property when its future state is independent its past states, given its present.

(Find these notes and more in my DLND Repo.)

Markovian Things

A Markov Model is a model that has the Markov property.

Pong is a type of Markovian model known as a Markov decision process [MDP], and can be represented as a graph where each node represents a unique game state and each edge represents transitions between the states. A transition occurs when an action is taken, which is selected using a policy. Often, to optimize between (1) leveraging one’s best-known policy and knowledge of the state space (exploitation) and (2) keeping an open mind concerning better policies and more rewarding paths through the state space, one uses a policy with some randomization (i.e., stochasticity) built in. (No need to recreate the wheel: read this!)

History Buff Conciliation

Ok, it’s not that history doesn’t matter in a Markov process. It’s that you can encode all the relevant history in the current state.

For example, say a rock is falling in a world without wind, friction, etc. If we just know its location x[t1] at time t1, we can’t say where it will be at time t2. The same goes if we know both x[t1] and its velocity, v[t1]. However, if we know x[t1], v[t1], and its acceleration, g, due to gravity, then we can say something about where the rock with be at time t2.

Policy and Reward

In reinforcement learning, they speak a lot about states (or state spaces), actions (or action spaces), and policies that maximize reward. It is not altogether dissimilar from physics, where we talk about states, configuration space, phase spaces, and geodesics.

A policy refers to the action taken for a given state. A reward is something attained for making good decisions, which has to do with having a good policy. The goal is to find a policy that maximizes your reward. To my mind, this resembles Lagrangians, Hamiltonians, and the principle of least action.

Q-Learning

The method we cover first is Q-Learning.
It’s pretty brute force: get in state s, try action a, and record the Q-value. Since action a probably landed you a new state, s’, try another action a’ and record that Q-value. Bumble around the state space in this manner for a long time and eventually you’ll have a dependable (state, action) table of Q-values. At this point, you can define your policy as choosing that action A that maximizes the Q-value given the state S.

In practice, devising such a table is only feasible for small state spaces. But most state spaces really aren’t that small… And so learning the Q function in this manner becomes untenable.

But how well do you really have to know the Q function? Afterall, we’re really just approximating it. Can’t we just use another approximation technique?

This is where deep learning comes into reinforcement learning, and the answer is, “Yes we can!”

Deep Q Networks

This was popularized as an ATARI game-playing master.
though it is a “better-known RL algorithm” than policy gradients (discussed next), Karpathy says, “Q-Learning is not a great algorithm” and that “most people prefer to use Policy Gradients, including the authors of the original DQN paper.”

Other things covered:

  • Discount Factor
  • Learning Rate
  • Exploration vs Exploitation

Policy Gradients

There are two algorithms in RL that crop up everywhere you look: policy gradients (PGs) and Q-learning. Karpathy says, “PG is preferred because it is end-to-end: there’s an explicit policy and a principled approach that directly optimizes the expected reward.”

Credit Assignment

After many rejections, you finally land the job of your dreams. Feels great, but could you do it again? Was it because you were charming, or because you were smart? Was it because the company was desperate, or because you were the right person for the job? Did all those rejections build character?

In RL, oftentimes a reward is delayed, and it is not automatically clear how to assign credit for the reward to the last N moves. Is the reward exclusively a fruit of the last move, or was it due to a decision your agent made 17 moves back?

Policy gradients are a solution to this problem.

Advantage

Weaknesses of RL: Brute force and without context

Pong is easy. But what about complex and strategic games, like Ocarina of Time? A human can guess that something a crazy villager said will come in handy at some later point in the game, or that a blue key likely fits into a blue door or a treasure chest made of ice. At the least, when a human sees something meaningful like a key, they know they should probably pick it up. A human understands context, the basics of physics, and nuances that could easily fly above a brutish agent’s head for the first bazillion policy rollouts…

A current research interest in artificial intelligence is how to supplement the brute power of existing methods with more elegant solutions motivated by the human mind.

Here is a 2016 paper on that: Building Machines That Learn and Think Like People

Competitor of DRL: Evolution Strategies

  • https://blog.openai.com/evolution-strategies/

Some Video

Some Papers

Written on June 15, 2017