cs.LGAug 17, 2026

Reinforcement Learning as (Discrete) Potential Theory

Authors: Christopher Connolly

Organizations: Computer Science Laboratory SRI International

Abstract

Reinforcement learning (RL) theory fundamentally depends on probability theory through the Markov chain. There is a deep connection between probability theory and potential theory. This paper reviews that connection and explores the potential-theoretic viewpoint for core reinforcement learning representations and algorithms under a fixed-policy assumption. This viewpoint may offer a path for improved sample efficiency and formal constraints that can be applied to RL. When the fixed-policy assumption is relaxed, the linear potential theory framework can be naturally extended to the nonlinear case.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Jul 8, 2026

Mathematical methods of reinforcement learning

Reinforcement learning (RL) is increasingly grounded in tools from probability, optimization, and operator theory. This survey organizes the mathematical structures that underpin the design and analysis of modern algorithms in RL. We begin from Markov decision processes (MDPs) and the Bellman operators, emphasizing contraction mappings, monotonicity, and fixed-point theory that yield convergence guarantees and rates for value and policy iteration, and temporal-difference schemes. We then develop the optimization perspective: stochastic approximation and martingale methods, convex duality and the role of regularization linking mirror/proximal methods. Function approximation is treated through linear and non-linear settings, covering stabilization, error decomposition, and sample-complexity via concentration inequalities for dependent data and mixing processes. We further cover off-policy evaluation/learning, constrained RL and constrained MDPs (CMDPs). Throughout we unify algorithmic templates under common operator and variational lenses, highlighting both finite-sample bounds and asymptotic results. Our presentation is intended to provide a unified mathematical entry point for researchers in probability, optimization, and statistics interested in reinforcement learning.
Mar 1, 2026

PAC Guarantees for Reinforcement Learning: Sample Complexity, Coverage, and Structure

When data is scarce or mistakes are costly, average-case metrics fall short. What a practitioner needs is a guarantee: with probability at least 1−δ1-δ, the learned policy is ε\varepsilon-close to optimal after NN episodes. This is the PAC promise, and between 2018 and 2025 the RL theory community made striking progress on when such promises can be kept. We survey that progress. Our organizing tool is the Coverage-Structure-Objective (CSO) framework, proposed here, which decomposes nearly every PAC sample complexity result into three factors: coverage (how data were obtained), structure (intrinsic MDP or function-class complexity), and objective (what the learner must deliver). CSO is not a theorem but an interpretive template that identifies bottlenecks and makes cross-setting comparison immediate. The technical core covers tight tabular baselines and the uniform-PAC bridge to regret; structural complexity measures (Bellman rank, witness rank, Bellman-Eluder dimension) governing learnability with function approximation; results for linear, kernel/NTK, and low-rank models; reward-free exploration as upfront coverage investment; and pessimistic offline RL where inherited coverage is the binding constraint. We provide practitioner tools: rate lookup tables indexed by CSO coordinates, Bellman residual diagnostics, coverage estimation with deployment gates, and per-episode policy certificates. A final section catalogs open problems, separating near-term targets from frontier questions where coverage, structure, and computation tangle in ways current theory cannot resolve.
Jul 20, 2026

Theoretical Foundations of max⁡\max@kk Reinforcement Learning

Reinforcement Learning is a cornerstone technique for modern large reasoning models. Usually, for difficult tasks such as code generation and theorem proving, the agent is evaluated by generating KK responses rather than sampling a single response, and performance is then measured using a retry-aware metric such as max⁡\max@kk. Despite their practical importance, the theoretical foundations of learning under such criteria remain limited. In this work, we provide a theoretical study of the max⁡\max@kk learning problem in finite-horizon reinforcement learning. We show that optimizing the max⁡\max@kk objectives is fundamentally different from standard expected-return maximization. In particular, we prove that Markovian policies are in general insufficient, identify a compact state augmentation that restores optimality, and explicitly characterize the performance gap that can arise between history-dependent and non-history-dependent policies. Moreover, we show that learning max⁡\max@kk-optimal policies is statistically harder than standard reinforcement learning and provide an efficient algorithm that achieves the optimal sample complexity rate.