Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Position: Benchmarking is Limited in Reinforcement Learning Research

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.16241 v1 pith:N3CJBWJE submitted 2024-06-23 cs.LG stat.ME

classification cs.LGstat.ME
keywords benchmarkingrigorousalgorithmscomputationalconductingcostsimprovementslearning
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Novel reinforcement learning algorithms, or improvements on existing ones, are commonly justified by evaluating their performance on benchmark environments and are compared to an ever-changing set of standard algorithms. However, despite numerous calls for improvements, experimental practices continue to produce misleading or unsupported claims. One reason for the ongoing substandard practices is that conducting rigorous benchmarking experiments requires substantial computational time. This work investigates the sources of increased computation costs in rigorous experiment designs. We show that conducting rigorous performance benchmarks will likely have computational costs that are often prohibitive. As a result, we argue for using an additional experimentation paradigm to overcome the limitations of benchmarking.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools