cs.ROMar 8, 2026

Relating Reinforcement Learning to Dynamic Programming-Based Planning

Authors: Filip V. GeorgievKalle G. TimperiBaşak SakçakSteven M. LaValle

Organizations: Center for Applied Computing, Faculty of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, University of Oulu, Finland · Dept. of Advanced Computing Sciences, Maastricht University, the Netherlands

Abstract

This paper bridges some of the gap between optimal planning and reinforcement learning (RL), both of which share roots in dynamic programming applied to sequential decision making or optimal control. Whereas planning typically favors deterministic models, goal termination, and cost minimization, RL tends to favor stochastic models, infinite-horizon discounting, and reward maximization in addition to learning-related parameters such as the learning rate and greediness factor. A derandomized version of RL is developed, analyzed, and implemented to yield performance comparisons with value iteration and Dijkstra's algorithm using simple planning models. Next, mathematical analysis shows: 1) conditions under which cost minimization and reward maximization are equivalent, 2) conditions for equivalence of single-shot goal termination and infinite-horizon episodic learning, and 3) conditions under which discounting causes goal achievement to fail. The paper then advocates for defining and optimizing truecost, rather than inserting arbitrary parameters to guide operations. Performance studies are then extended to the stochastic case, using planning-oriented criteria and comparing value iteration to RL with learning rates and greediness factors.

Explore similar work

Apr 20, 2026cs.LG

Scale-free adaptive planning for deterministic dynamics & discounted rewards

We address the problem of planning in an environment with deterministic dynamics and stochastic rewards with discounted returns. The optimal value function is not known, nor are the rewards bounded. We propose Platypoos, a simple scale-free planning algorithm that adapts to the unknown scale and smoothness of the reward function. We provide a sample complexity analysis for Platypoos that improves upon prior work and holds simultaneously over a broad range of discount factors and reward scales, without the algorithm knowing them. We also establish a matching lower bound showing our analysis is optimal up to constants.
Peter L. Bartlett, Victor Gabillon, Jennifer Healey +1
Sep 11, 2026stat.ML

Near-Optimal Reinforcement Learning with Multi-Step Transition Lookahead

We study reinforcement learning (RL) with transition look-ahead, where the agent may observe which states would be visited upon playing any sequence of \ell actions before deciding its course of action. Although look-ahead can substantially improve achievable performance, it is known that optimal planning with multi-step transition look-ahead is NP-hard, but this hardness was established using discount factors arbitrarily close to one. It was therefore unknown whether the problem remains hard for any discount factor, and whether near-optimal planning can nevertheless be performed efficiently. We resolve both questions. First, we show that for every fixed rational discount factor (γ(0,1)\gamma\in(0,1)), exact planning remains NP-hard. Second, we introduce a randomized polynomial-time approximation scheme for every fixed look-ahead depth. We then extend our approach to unknown transitions and stochastic rewards using optimism and variance-adaptive confidence bounds. The resulting algorithm achieves cumulative regret whose leading term matches classical tabular discounted RL up to logarithmic factors. Thus, although exact planning with transition look-ahead is NP-hard, efficient near-optimal planning and learning remain possible.
Corentin Pla, Hugo Richard, Marc Abeille +1
May 7, 2026cs.LG

On Training in Imagination

State-of-the-art model-based reinforcement learning methods train policies on imagined rollouts. These rollouts are trajectories generated by a learned dynamics model and are scored by a learned reward model, but without querying the true environment during policy updates. We study this training paradigm by quantifying how errors in learned dynamics and reward models affect returns and policy optimization. First, we extend the analysis of Asadi et al. (2018) to MDPs with learned reward models, and derive the optimal sample allocation--the ratio of dynamics samples to reward samples that minimizes a bound on return error under power-law scaling assumptions. We identify lower Lipschitz constants of the learned dynamics, reward, and policy as a representation desideratum that tightens this bound, and we connect this perspective to the temporal-straightening objective of Wang et al. (2026). Second, we examine how policy optimization with REINFORCE tolerates noisy rewards, which are often cheaper to obtain. We show that zero-mean reward noise leaves the gradient estimator unbiased and adds at most a variance term that decreases with the number of rollouts. This introduces a practical tradeoff: given a fixed budget, should one buy more rollouts with cheaper but noisier rewards, or fewer rollouts with more expensive but less noisy rewards? We reduce this choice to a one-dimensional optimization problem and characterize the optimum.
Nadav Timor, Ravid Shwartz-Ziv, Micah Goldblum +2