Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 56 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 38 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 26 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 22 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 84 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 182 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 420 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.5 30 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Sharp Analysis for KL-Regularized Contextual Bandits and RLHF (2411.04625v2)

Published 7 Nov 2024 in cs.LG and stat.ML

Abstract: Reverse-Kullback-Leibler (KL) regularization has emerged to be a predominant technique used to enhance policy optimization in reinforcement learning (RL) and reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), which forces the learned policy to stay close to a reference policy. While the effectiveness and necessity of KL-regularization have been empirically demonstrated in various practical scenarios, current theoretical analysis of KL-regularized RLHF still obtains the same $\mathcal{O}(1 / \epsilon2)$ sample complexity as problems without KL-regularization. To understand the fundamental distinction between policy learning objectives with KL-regularization and ones without KL-regularization, we are the first to theoretically demonstrate the power of KL-regularization by providing a sharp analysis for KL-regularized contextual bandits and RLHF, revealing an $\mathcal{O}(1 / \epsilon)$ sample complexity when $\epsilon$ is sufficiently small. We further explore the role of data coverage in contextual bandits and RLHF. While the coverage assumption is commonly employed in offline RLHF to link the samples from the reference policy to the optimal policy, often at the cost of a multiplicative dependence on the coverage coefficient, its impact on the sample complexity of online RLHF remains unclear. Previous theoretical analyses of online RLHF typically require explicit exploration and additional structural assumptions on the reward function class. In contrast, we show that with sufficient coverage from the reference policy, a simple two-stage mixed sampling strategy can achieve a sample complexity with only an additive dependence on the coverage coefficient. Our results provide a comprehensive understanding of the roles of KL-regularization and data coverage in RLHF, shedding light on the design of more efficient RLHF algorithms.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Don't miss out on important new AI/ML research

See which papers are being discussed right now on X, Reddit, and more:

“Emergent Mind helps me see which AI papers have caught fire online.”

Philip

Philip

Creator, AI Explained on YouTube