Prioritized Level Replay

Minqi Jiang, Edward Grefenstette, Tim Rocktäschel

Keywords: Reinforcement Learning, Procedurally Generated Environments, Curriculum Learning, Procgen Benchmark

Abstract: Simulated environments with procedurally generated content have become popular benchmarks for testing systematic generalization of reinforcement learning agents. Every level in such an environment is algorithmically created, thereby exhibiting a unique configuration of underlying factors of variation, such as layout, positions of entities, asset appearances, or even the rules governing environment transitions. Fixed sets of training levels can be determined to aid comparison and reproducibility, and test levels can be held out to evaluate the generalization and robustness of agents. While prior work samples training levels in a direct way (e.g.~uniformly) for the agent to learn from, we investigate the hypothesis that different levels provide different learning progress for an agent at specific times during training. We introduce Prioritized Level Replay, a general framework for estimating the future learning potential of a level given the current state of the agent's policy. We find that temporal-difference (TD) errors, while previously used to selectively sample past transitions, also prove effective for scoring a level's future learning potential when the agent replays (that is, revisits) that level to generate entirely new episodes of experiences from it. We report significantly improved sample-efficiency and generalization on the majority of Procgen Benchmark environments as well as two challenging MiniGrid environments. Lastly, we present a qualitative analysis showing that Prioritized Level Replay induces an implicit curriculum, taking the agent gradually from easier to harder levels.

One-sentence Summary: TD error can be exploited to score procedurally generated levels for future learning potential, thereby inducing a curriculum from easier to harder levels and providing significant gains in OpenAI Procgen Benchmark and MiniGrid.

Code Of Ethics: I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics

Community Implementations: [ 2 code implementations](https://www.catalyzex.com/paper/arxiv:2010.03934/code)

Reviewed Version (pdf): https://openreview.net/references/pdf?id=5ImRhrfAOd