When Does Dynamics Randomization Test Context Inference?

Methods for generalization in model-based reinforcement learning typically assume that an agent cannot recover the latent context governing the environment dynamics from its own experience, and therefore supplies it externally. We formalize and test this assumption with predictive sufficiency, which quantifies what access to the context adds to next-step prediction under the visitation distribution an agent induces, and separates that quantity into a history-recoverable part, a residual requiring the true context, and the deficit added by a finite model. We classify context-aware algorithms by the predictive risk their conditioning set can target and demonstrate across environments of increasing identification difficulty that the headroom does not follow the MDP class. The same task under different priors leaves predictive headroom in one setting and nothing distinguishable from zero in another, where the agent's behavior implicitly identifies the context and any benefit of such a mechanism cannot be attributed to missing information. Where headroom persists, the learned state exposes it only partially, and adding the true context still lowers the risk. Our contribution is a practical criterion for matching contextual mechanisms to the information available to them, estimated from the ordinary trained agent without a reference policy.

At the core of modern prompting techniques is contextual sensitivity, the ability of large language models to adapt their predictions based on inference-time context. Despite its central role, inference behavior under strong contextual influence remains poorly understood, particularly at the level of internal inference dynamics. We introduce a theoretical framework for analyzing contextual influence through inference dynamics, enabling quantitative characterization of inference behavior beyond output-level answer changes. Our analysis shows that inference dynamics do not exhibit unbounded drift under repeated contextual assertions. Instead, predictive representations converge to stable, query-dependent regimes that fundamentally constrain whether contextual signals can alter a model's prediction. This leads to a surprising finding: Repeated contextual assertions do not act as accumulating evidence during inference and may therefore fail to alter a model's prediction even under unbounded repetition, while in other cases a prediction change becomes inevitable. We empirically validate our theoretical predictions, demonstrating strong alignment between theory and observed inference behavior. These contributions offer a principled pathway toward characterizing the limits of contextual influence during inference, providing practical implications for model development.

We study dynamic context scheduling as a training instrument for contextual re- inforcement learning. Rather than treating intra-episode context variation as a deployment reality, we treat it as a controlled shaping mechanism. Thereby, context evolves within each training episode according to a predetermined schedule, expos- ing the policy to a richer and more temporally structured region of the environment parameter space. We introduce DYNAMICCARLENV, a framework that wraps contextual environments with pluggable schedule families, such as sinusoidal off- sets or cosine annealing. Across CartPole, BipedalWalker and VehicleRacing with CARL contextualization, we show that dynamic schedules match or outperform static context baselines in the out-of-distribution (OOD) regimes. Interestingly, for the more complex BipedalWalker and VehicleRacing environments we also achieve higher in-distribution (ID) evaluation performance. Preliminary findings indicate that automatic search for multi-stage curricula can successfully discover schedules that improve generalization, performing comparably to extensive grid search over single-stage schedulers.