On Convergence of Average-Reward Q-Learning in Weakly Communicating Markov Decision Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyzes reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms for Markov decision processes (MDPs) under the average-reward criterion. We focus on Q-learning algorithms based on relative value iteration (RVI), which are model-free stochastic analogues of the classical RVI method for average-reward MDPs. These algorithms have low per-iteration complexity, making them well-suited for large state space problems. We extend the almost-sure convergence analysis of RVI Q-learning algorithms developed by Abounadi, Bertsekas, and Borkar (2001) from unichain to weakly communicating MDPs. This extension is important both practically and theoretically: weakly communicating MDPs cover a much broader range of applications compared to unichain MDPs, and their optimality equations have a richer solution structure (with multiple degrees of freedom), introducing additional complexity in proving algorithmic convergence. We also characterize the sets to which RVI Q-learning algorithms converge, showing that they are compact, connected, potentially nonconvex, and comprised of solutions to the average-reward optimality equation, with exactly one less degree of freedom than the general solution set of this equation. Furthermore, we extend our analysis to two RVI-based hierarchical average-reward RL algorithms using the options framework, proving their almost-sure convergence and characterizing their sets of convergence under the assumption that the underlying semi-Markov decision process is weakly communicating.
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 | 0.013 | 0.066 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".