Is Exploration or Optimization the Problem for Deep Reinforcement Learning?

In the era of deep reinforcement learning, making progress is more complex, as the collected experience must be compressed into a deep model for future exploitation and sampling. Many papers have shown that training a deep learning policy under the changing state and action distribution leads to sub-optimal performance, or even collapse. This naturally leads to the concern that even if the community creates improved exploration algorithms or reward objectives, will those improvements fall on the $\mathit{\text{deaf}}\mathit{\text{ears}}$ of optimization difficulties. This work proposes a new $\mathit{\text{practical}}$ sub-optimality estimator to determine optimization limitations of deep reinforcement learning algorithms. Through experiments across environments and RL algorithms, it is shown that the difference between the best experience generated is 2-3$\times$ better than the policies’ learned performance. This large difference indicates that deep RL methods only exploit half of the good experience they generate.