Robust Transfer Learning with Side Information

Offline reinforcement learning (RL) enables data-efficient and safe policy learning without online exploration, but its performance often degrades under distribution shift. The learned policy may visit out-of-distribution state-action pairs where value estimates and learned dynamics are unreliable. To address policy-induced extrapolation and transition uncertainty in a unified framework, we formulate offline RL as robust policy optimization, treating the transition kernel as a decision variable within an uncertainty set and optimizing the policy against the worst-case dynamics. We propose Robust Regularized Policy Iteration (RRPI), which replaces the intractable max-min bilevel objective with a tractable KL-regularized surrogate and derives an efficient policy iteration procedure based on a robust regularized Bellman operator. We provide theoretical guarantees by showing that the proposed operator is a $γ$-contraction and that iteratively updating the surrogate yields monotonic improvement of the original robust objective with convergence. Experiments on D4RL benchmarks demonstrate that RRPI achieves strong average performance, outperforming recent baselines including percentile-based methods on the majority of environments while remaining competitive on the rest. Moreover, RRPI exhibits robust performance by aligning lower $Q$-values with high epistemic uncertainty, which prevents the policy from executing unreliable out-of-distribution actions.

Distributional shifts arise when the target deployment environment differs from the source environment that generated the training data. Robust learning frameworks such as Distributionally Robust Optimization (DRO) and Robust Satisficing (RS) aim to address this challenge, yet their finite-sample guarantees under such shifts, and their systematic comparison, remain underexplored: existing analyses typically establish guarantees either in the source environment or for adversarial worst-case performance over an ambiguity set. This paper instead studies generalization error in the target environment---the excess loss under the shifted target distribution. Our contributions are threefold. First, we derive finite-sample generalization error bounds in the shifted target environment for both DRO and RS. These bounds explicitly characterize the trade-off between reduced sensitivity to shift and the regularization penalty induced by each method's robustness hyperparameter, and they avoid the curse of dimensionality associated with Wasserstein empirical concentration. Second, when partial shift information such as shift magnitude or direction is available, we propose information-directed hyperparameter calibrations and compare the two methods given the same information. Under these calibrations, and in the partial-information regimes we study, DRO and RS exhibit complementary theoretical and empirical behavior. Finally, we apply the framework to a network lot-sizing problem, using it to interpret how robust policies respond to positive shifts in the demand distribution. Together, these results fill a gap in understanding the statistical properties of robust learning methods under distributional shifts and provide a principled basis for comparing DRO and RS.

Distributionally robust Markov decision processes provide a principled framework for sequential decision making under model uncertainty. We study how many samples are necessary and sufficient to learn an $\varepsilon$-optimal robust policy under the average-reward criterion. A generative model provides samples from the nominal transition kernel, whereas policy performance is evaluated over $(s,a)$-rectangular total-variation uncertainty sets of radius at most $σ$. Let $H_0$ and $H_σ$ denote the nominal and robust optimal bias spans, respectively. We identify $σH_0$ as the perturbation scale separating high- and low-tolerance regimes. Our matching upper and lower bounds show that, up to logarithmic factors, the minimax total sample complexity is $NSA \asymp \frac{SA}{\varepsilon^2}\begin{cases} \min\{H_0,H_σ\}, & \varepsilon\gtrsimσH_0,\\ \min\{H_0,H_σ\}+σH_σ^2, & \varepsilon\lesssimσH_0. \end{cases}$ Here $S$ and $A$ are the numbers of states and actions, and $N$ is the number of samples per state-action pair. The sample complexity consists of a linear-span term that resembles the nominal AMDP results and a robustness-specific term that appears only in the low-tolerance regime. We attain these rates using reduction-based plug-in procedures that select the reduction---nominal or robust---and its discount factor: a span-informed procedure that makes these choices using known span parameters, and a span-agnostic procedure that calibrates both choices from data.