cs.LGApr 17, 2026

Multi-objective Reinforcement Learning With Augmented States Requires Rewards After Deployment

Authors: Peter VamplewCameron Foale

Organizations: Institute of Innovation, Science and Sustainability, Federation University Australia, University Drive, Mt Helen, 3350, Victoria, Australia

Abstract

This research note identifies a previously overlooked distinction between multi-objective reinforcement learning (MORL), and more conventional single-objective reinforcement learning (RL). It has previously been noted that the optimal policy for an MORL agent with a non-linear utility function is required to be conditioned on both the current environmental state and on some measure of the previously accrued reward. This is generally implemented by concatenating the observed state of the environment with the discounted sum of previous rewards to create an augmented state. While augmented states have been widely-used in the MORL literature, one implication of their use has not previously been reported -- namely that they require the agent to have continued access to the reward signal (or a proxy thereof) after deployment, even if no further learning is required. This note explains why this is the case, and considers the practical repercussions of this requirement.

Explore similar work

Apr 27, 2026cs.LG

A Reward-Free Viewpoint on Multi-Objective Reinforcement Learning

Many sequential decision-making tasks involve optimizing multiple conflicting objectives, requiring policies that adapt to different user preferences. In multi-objective reinforcement learning (MORL), one widely studied approach} addresses this by training a single policy network conditioned on preference-weighted rewards. In this paper, we explore a novel algorithmic perspective: leveraging reward-free reinforcement learning (RFRL) for MORL. While RFRL has historically been studied independently of MORL, it learns optimal policies for any possible reward function, making it a natural fit for MORL's challenge of handling unknown user preferences. We propose using the RFRL's training objective as an auxiliary task to enhance MORL, enabling more effective knowledge sharing beyond the multi-objective reward function given at training time. To this end, we adapt a state-of-the-art RFRL algorithm to the MORL setting and introduce a preference-guided exploration strategy that focuses learning on relevant parts of the environment. Through extensive experiments and ablation studies, we demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art MORL methods across diverse MO-Gymnasium tasks, achieving superior performance and data efficiency. This work provides the first systematic adaptation of RFRL to MORL, demonstrating its potential as a scalable and empirically effective solution to multi-objective policy learning.
Ying-Tu Chen, Wei Hung, Bing-Shu Wu +2
Jun 1, 2026cs.LG

Position: Deployed Reinforcement Learning should be Continual

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.
Parnian Behdin, Kevin Roice, Golnaz Mesbahi
May 11, 2026cs.LG

Controllability in preference-conditioned multi-objective reinforcement learning

Multi-objective reinforcement learning (MORL) allows a user to express preference over outcomes in terms of the relative importance of the objectives, but standard metrics cannot capture whether changes in preference reliably change the agent's behavior in the intended way, a property termed controllability. As a result, preference-conditioned agents can score well on standard MORL metrics while being insensitive to the preference input. If the ability to control agents cannot be reliably assessed, the symbolic interface that MORL provides between user intent and agent behavior is broken. Mainstream MORL metrics alone fail to measure the controllability of preference-conditioned agents, motivating a complementary metric specifically designed to that end. We hope the results spur discussion in the community on existing evaluation protocols to consolidate advances in preference adaptation in MORL to larger and more complex problems.
Pau de las Heras Molins, Beyazit Yalcinkaya, Lasse Peters +2