Reinforcement Learning in the Real World: A Survey of Statistical Challenges and Future Directions
Authors: Asim H. Gazi, Yongyi Guo, Daiqi Gao, Ziping Xu, Kelly W. Zhang, Susan A. Murphy
Organizations: Department of Computer Science, Harvard University · Department of Statistics, Harvard University · Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin–Madison · School of Data Science and Society, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · Department of Mathematics, Imperial College London
Abstract
Reinforcement learning (RL) has achieved remarkable success in real-world decision-making across diverse domains, including gaming, robotics, online advertising, public health, and natural language processing. Despite these advances, a substantial gap remains between RL research and its deployment in many practical settings. Two recurring challenges often underlie this gap. First, many settings offer limited opportunity for the agent to interact extensively with the target environment due to practical constraints. Second, many target environments often undergo substantial changes, requiring redesign and redeployment of RL systems (e.g., advancements in science and technology that change the landscape of healthcare delivery). Addressing these challenges and bridging the gap between basic research and application requires theory and methodology that directly inform the design, implementation, and continual improvement of RL systems in real-world settings. In this paper, we frame the application of RL in practice as a three-component process: (i) online learning and optimization during deployment, (ii) post- or between-deployment offline analyses, and (iii) repeated cycles of deployment and redeployment to continually improve the RL system. We provide a narrative review of recent advances that address the statistical challenges arising across these three components, including methods for enhancing sample efficiency during online deployment, maximizing data utility for post- or between-deployment inference, and designing sequences of deployments for continual improvement. We also outline future research directions in RL that are use-inspired -- aiming for impactful application of RL in practice.
Reinforcement Learning (RL) has received increasing attention and adoption in real-world use cases. Most of these systems follow a train-then-fix paradigm, where trained agents do not learn while interacting with the world until performance degrades and retraining becomes necessary. In this position paper, we argue that deploying an agent that is incapable of optimality, but receives an evaluative reward signal, is inherently a continual RL problem. We identify four sources of non-stationarity after deployment that necessitate never-ending learning, and highlight why the best deployed agents never stop adapting. We analyze successful examples of continual RL in the real world, and present the community with the advantages and measures to move away from the current train-then-fix paradigm.
Deploying reinforcement learning policies in the real world requires adapting to time-varying environments. We study this problem in the contextual Markov Decision Process (cMDP) framework, where a family of environments is indexed by a low-dimensional context unknown at test time. The standard approach decomposes the problem: train a so-called "universal policy" which assumes knowledge of the true context, then pair it with a context estimator which approximates context using the observed trajectory. We identify a simple, counterintuitive trick that substantially improves the estimator: randomly delete a fraction of the training buffer after each round. This works because data is collected across multiple rounds using progressively better policies, and older trajectories come from a different distribution than what the estimator will face at deployment time; random deletion creates an implicit exponential decay on older data while preserving diversity without requiring any explicit identification of which samples are stale. This reduces robustness gap by 30% for MLPs and by 6% on average for recurrent networks. Strikingly, it allows a narrow MLP with 5x fewer parameters to outperform a wide MLP trained without deletion. To understand when and why deletion helps, we analyze regularized empirical risk minimization with a mismatch between the train distribution and the distribution at deployment; in this idealized setting, we prove that removing a single uniformly random training point decreases expected test loss in expectation under mild conditions. For ridge regression we make this quantitative: deletion helps when the regularization coefficient is moderate and the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is sufficiently low, and, crucially, this SNR threshold gives a direct measure of how large the distribution mismatch between training and deployment must be for deletion to be beneficial.
Param Budhraja, Aditya Gangrade, Alex Olshevsky +1
Online reinforcement learning (RL) agents increasingly depend on knowledge acquired offline to achieve practical efficiency. Originally studied in offline-to-online RL, this paradigm now spans foundation model post-training and embodied intelligence, with prior types expanding from offline datasets and pre-trained policies to increasingly diverse knowledge sources such as multimodal foundation models and generative world models. Offline priors have become central to how deep RL is developed and deployed. However, this reliance introduces a challenge that the prevailing benchmark-driven paradigm cannot resolve: because prior validity varies across deployments and shifts during training, no single approach to managing it is universally optimal, and benchmark rankings offer limited guidance for real-world deployments. Rather than pursuing universal solutions, we argue that the field should shift to diagnosis-driven tension management, in which deployment-specific evidence guides how the learner relates to its priors throughout training, enabling both flexible and adaptive deployment. We support this position with a framework characterizing how priors reshape online optimization through three functional roles, controlled experiments demonstrating help-or-hurt reversals, cross-domain evidence from foundation model post-training to embodied intelligence, and engagement with five substantive counterarguments.