Objective-Behavior Alignment: Diagnostics for MORL Policy Selection

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.

Recent advances in deep reinforcement learning (RL) have shown that improving neural network architectures can yield substantial gains in sample efficiency and asymptotic performance without altering the underlying algorithms. In contrast, work on multi-objective reinforcement learning (MORL), which aims to discover a set of policies that balance trade-offs among conflicting objectives, has predominantly focused on algorithmic innovations, leaving the area of architectures underexplored. While the optimal policies and value functions can differ significantly depending on the trade-offs, MORL algorithms commonly represent them with simple feedforward networks conditioned on the trade-off. This raises the question of whether the performance of the algorithms could be improved with more expressive function approximators. In this paper, we integrate recent advances in neural network design: (i) observation and feature normalization, (ii) weight normalization, and (iii) modeling of distributional returns with an entropy-regularized MORL algorithm. The empirical results across standard continuous control benchmarks demonstrate that these changes substantially improve the quality of the produced solution sets without requiring major changes to the underlying algorithm.

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.