REVIEW 1 cited by
Evaluating the Performance of Reinforcement Learning Algorithms
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Performance evaluations are critical for quantifying algorithmic advances in reinforcement learning. Recent reproducibility analyses have shown that reported performance results are often inconsistent and difficult to replicate. In this work, we argue that the inconsistency of performance stems from the use of flawed evaluation metrics. Taking a step towards ensuring that reported results are consistent, we propose a new comprehensive evaluation methodology for reinforcement learning algorithms that produces reliable measurements of performance both on a single environment and when aggregated across environments. We demonstrate this method by evaluating a broad class of reinforcement learning algorithms on standard benchmark tasks.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Learning more with the same effort: how randomization improves the robustness of a robotic deep reinforcement learning agent
Randomizing camera position during simulated robot-arm training improves robustness to viewpoint changes by about 25 percent average accuracy over fixed-camera training, at the same training budget.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.