On the Global Convergence Rates of Softmax Policy Gradient Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We make three contributions toward better understanding policy gradient methods in the tabular setting. First, we show that with the true gradient, policy gradient with a softmax parametrization converges at a $O(1/t)$ rate, with constants depending on the problem and initialization. This result significantly expands the recent asymptotic convergence results. The analysis relies on two findings: that the softmax policy gradient satisfies a \L{}ojasiewicz inequality, and the minimum probability of an optimal action during optimization can be bounded in terms of its initial value. Second, we analyze entropy regularized policy gradient and show that it enjoys a significantly faster linear convergence rate $O(e^{-c \cdot t})$ toward softmax optimal policy $(c > 0)$. This result resolves an open question in the recent literature. Finally, combining the above two results and additional new $\Omega(1/t)$ lower bound results, we explain how entropy regularization improves policy optimization, even with the true gradient, from the perspective of convergence rate. The separation of rates is further explained using the notion of non-uniform \L{}ojasiewicz degree. These results provide a theoretical understanding of the impact of entropy and corroborate existing empirical studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.082 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".