Skip to content

Rethinking the Suitability of Reinforcement Learning Algorithms Under Practical Transfer Constraints

Jul 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2607.17326 · 0 citations · 35 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

The wall-clock time required to train a decent policy is an important consideration for practitioners, and it is found that the sample-inefficient PPO algorithm can produce a performant policy faster than relatively more sample-efficient algorithms such as SAC and TD-MPC2, validating the common understanding of massively parallel training paradigms.

Abstract

Transfer-oriented reinforcement learning requires evaluating algorithms along dimensions that go beyond standard sample efficiency. We focus on two dimensions: practical efficiency, which asks whether conclusions about algorithm suitability change under wall-clock rather than interaction-based budgets, and robustness under dynamics mismatch, which asks how different learning paradigms respond to variability in the training distribution induced by domain randomization. We provide two insights to reinforcement-learning practitioners. First, comparing the sample efficiency of different algorithms is often an insufficient criterion in transfer-oriented settings. The wall-clock time required to train a decent policy is an important consideration for practitioners, and we find that the sample-inefficient PPO algorithm can produce a performant policy faster than relatively more sample-efficient algorithms such as SAC and TD-MPC2, validating the common understanding of massively parallel training paradigms. Second, domain randomization can help different kinds of algorithms learn robust policies. In particular, although PPO, SAC, and TD-MPC2 represent different RL paradigms - on-policy, off-policy, and model-based learning and planning, respectively - we find that domain randomization affects all three algorithms in a similar way. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first controlled comparison of the effect of domain-randomization coverage on PPO, SAC, and TD-MPC2 under the same transfer protocol. Taken together, these two insights highlight the importance of evaluating RL algorithms not only by sample efficiency, but also by practical considerations such as training time and the algorithms'ability to produce usable policies.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

RLDISCOVER: LLM-driven co-evolution of reinforcement learning algorithms

LLM-guided program evolution has enabled discoveries in mathematics and computational optimization, raising the prospect of reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms that self-evolve to improve how agents learn. However, realizing this prospect faces two obstacles. Joint search over coupled algorithmic components is diffi...

Hao-Ran Li, Z. Ge, Xiao-Ming Yuan et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

The Model Knows Another Way: Strategy Switching for Effective RLVR Exploration

This work introduces Problem--Strategy Rollout Allocation (PSRA), which treats unguided and strategy-conditioned prompts as competing exploration arms and uses Bayesian sequential allocation to direct a fixed rollout budget toward arms most likely to yield informative, non-saturated groups.

Jin Cui, Xin-Yue Long, Bo-Ran Zhao et al. · 1 citation
Preprint Sep 2026

Policy Gradient over History-Dependent Policy Classes for LQR with Domain Randomization

This work first study PG of domain randomized LQR over history-dependent policy classes, such as finite impulse response controllers, as they can extend the possibilities of simultaneous stabilization, and proposes a curriculum learning based algorithm which gradually expands the memory of the controller.

Tesshu Fujinami, Bruce D. Lee, Anastasios Tsiamis et al. · 0 citations
#natural language process... Preprint Sep 2026

Expert-Space Exploration in MoE Reinforcement Learning

ESRL is introduced, an architecture-aware framework that explicitly explores the expert-routing space of MoE models, and preserves high-confidence experts as anchors, and restricts stochastic routing to a plausible candidate pool, thereby retaining reliable computation paths.

Hong-Yi He, Zheng-Wen Lin, Xiao Liu et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

Rethinking Probability-Based Reinforcement Learning From Posterior Concentration

Verifier-free reinforcement learning with probability-based rewards offers a promising way to train LLMs on general reasoning tasks where external verifiers are unavailable. Yet the reliability of these rewards, especially in long-horizon reasoning, remains underexplored. This work identifies a length-dependent failure...

Shiu-hong Kao, Yu-Bo Zhao, Zhen Tian et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

Rationale-Guided Policy Optimization: Learning to Reason with Adaptive Rationale Scaffolding

On-policy reinforcement learning has become a central paradigm for improving the reasoning abilities of large language models. However, its effectiveness is often limited by reward sparsity: when a model fails to discover correct trajectories for difficult problems, the optimization process receives little useful signa...

Hoang Phan, M. Pham, Chau Pham et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.