When Should We Prefer State-to-Visual DAgger over Visual Reinforcement Learning?
Tongzhou Mu, Zhaoyang Li, Stanislaw Wiktor Strzelecki, Xiu Yuan, Yunchao Yao, Litian Liang, Hao Su
Abstract
Learning policies from high-dimensional visual inputs, such as pixels and point clouds, is crucial in various applications. Visual reinforcement learning is a promising approach that directly trains policies from visual observations, although it faces challenges in sample efficiency and computational costs. This study conducts an empirical comparison of State-to-Visual DAgger — a two-stage framework that initially trains a state policy before adopting online imitation to learn a visual policy — and Visual RL across a diverse set of tasks. We evaluate both methods across 16 tasks from three benchmarks, focusing on their asymptotic performance, sample efficiency, and computational costs. Surprisingly, our findings reveal that State-to-Visual DAgger does not universally outperform Visual RL but shows significant advantages in challenging tasks, offering more consistent performance. In contrast, its benefits in sample efficiency are less pronounced, although it often reduces the overall wall-clock time required for training. Based on our findings, we provide recommendations for practitioners and hope that our results contribute valuable perspectives for future research in visual policy learning.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers4
- PALM: Progress-Aware Policy Learning via Affordance Reasoning for Long-Horizon Robotic ManipulationYuanzhe Liu, Jingyuan Zhu, Yuchen Mo, Gen Li et al.CVPR 2026 · 31 citations
- Accelerating Visual-Policy Learning through Parallel Differentiable SimulationHaoxiang You, Yilang Liu, Ian AbrahamNeurIPS 2025 · 7 citations
- Task-Aware Exploration via a Predictive Bisimulation MetricDayang Liang, Ruihan LIU, Lipeng Wan, Yunlong Liu et al.ICML 2026 · 1 citation
- To Distill or Decide? Understanding the Algorithmic Trade-off in Partially Observable RLYuda Song, Dhruv Rohatgi, Aarti Singh, J. Andrew BagnellNeurIPS 2025
Builds on14
- Dream to Control: Learning Behaviors by Latent ImaginationDanijar Hafner, Timothy P. Lillicrap, Jimmy Ba, Mohammad NorouziICLR 2020 · 1,852 citations
- CURL: Contrastive Unsupervised Representations for Reinforcement LearningMichael Laskin, Aravind Srinivas, Pieter AbbeelICML 2020 · 1,261 citations
- Mastering Atari with Discrete World ModelsDanijar Hafner, Timothy P. Lillicrap, Mohammad Norouzi, Jimmy BaICLR 2021 · 1,170 citations
- Image Augmentation Is All You Need: Regularizing Deep Reinforcement Learning from PixelsDenis Yarats, Ilya Kostrikov, Rob FergusICLR 2021 · 911 citations
- Reinforcement Learning with Augmented DataMichael Laskin, Kimin Lee, Adam Stooke, Lerrel Pinto et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 833 citations
Related papers
- RLIF: Interactive Imitation Learning as Reinforcement LearningJianlan Luo, Perry Dong, Yuexiang Zhai, Yi Ma et al.ICLR 2024 · 31 citations
- VRL3: A Data-Driven Framework for Visual Deep Reinforcement LearningChe Wang, Xufang Luo, Keith W. Ross, Dongsheng LiNeurIPS 2022 · 72 citations
- Generalizing Consistency Policy to Visual RL with Prioritized Proximal Experience RegularizationHaoran Li, Zhennan Jiang, Yuhui Chen, Dongbin ZhaoNeurIPS 2024 · 16 citations
- Task-Induced Representation LearningJun Yamada, Karl Pertsch, Anisha Gunjal, Joseph J. LimICLR 2022 · 15 citations
- Learning from Visual Observation via Offline Pretrained State-to-Go TransformerBohan Zhou, Ke Li, Jiechuan Jiang, Zongqing LuNeurIPS 2023 · 17 citations
