Beyond Least Squares: Uniform Approximation and the Hidden Cost of Misspecification
Davide Maran, Csaba Szepesvári
Abstract
We study the problem of controlling worst-case errors in misspecified linear regression under the random design setting, where the regression function is estimated via (penalized) least-squares. This setting arises naturally in value function approximation for bandit algorithms and reinforcement learning (RL). Our first main contribution is the observation that the amplification of the misspecification error when using least-squares is governed by the Lebesgue constant , a classical quantity from approximation theory that depends on the choice of the feature subspace and the covariate distribution. We also show that this dependence on the misspecification error is tight for least-squares regression: in general, no method minimizing the empirical squared loss, including regularized least-squares, can improve it substantially. We argue this explains the empirical observation that some feature-maps (e.g., those derived from the Fourier bases) “work better in RL” than others (e.g., polynomials): given some covariate distribution, the Lebesgue constant is known to be highly sensitive to choice of the feature-map. As a second contribution, we propose a method that augments the original feature set with auxiliary features designed to reduce the error amplification. We then prove that the method successfully competes with an “oracle” that knows the best way of using the auxiliary features to reduce this amplification. For example, when the domain is a real interval and the features are monomials, our method reduces the amplification factor to O (1) as d → ∞ , while without our method, least-squares with the monomials (and in fact polynomials) will suffer a worst-case error amplification of order Ω( d ) . It follows that there are functions and feature maps for which our method is consistent, while least-squares is inconsistent.
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.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 7a6895d9-c6be-429a-aaeb-eaaa6232df4eBuilds on4
- Is a Good Representation Sufficient for Sample Efficient Reinforcement Learning?Simon S. Du, Sham M. Kakade, Ruosong Wang, Lin F. YangICLR 2020 · 213 citations
- Learning with Good Feature Representations in Bandits and in RL with a Generative ModelTor Lattimore, Csaba Szepesvári, Gellért WeiszICML 2020 · 181 citations
- Local Linearity: the Key for No-regret Reinforcement Learning in Continuous MDPsDavide Maran, Alberto Maria Metelli, Matteo Papini, Marcello RestelliNeurIPS 2024 · 6 citations
- The Optimal Approximation Factors in Misspecified Off-Policy Value Function EstimationPhilip Amortila, Nan Jiang, Csaba SzepesváriICML 2023 · 5 citations
Related papers
- Misspecified Q-Learning with Sparse Linear Function Approximation: Tight Bounds on Approximation ErrorAlly Yalei Du, Lin Yang, Ruosong WangICLR 2025
- Does Sparsity Help in Learning Misspecified Linear Bandits?Jialin Dong, Lin YangICML 2023 · 2 citations
- Achieving Constant Regret in Linear Markov Decision ProcessesWeitong Zhang, Zhiyuan Fan, Jiafan He, Quanquan GuNeurIPS 2024 · 6 citations
- Randomized Exploration in Reinforcement Learning with General Value Function ApproximationHaque Ishfaq, Qiwen Cui, Viet Nguyen, Alex Ayoub et al.ICML 2021 · 3 citations
- Is Pessimism Provably Efficient for Offline RL?Ying Jin, Zhuoran Yang, Zhaoran WangICML 2021 · 419 citations
