On the Effectiveness of Fine-tuning Versus Meta-reinforcement Learning

TL;DR: The authors showed that multi-task pretraining with fine-tuning on new tasks performs equally as well, or better, than meta-pretraining with meta test-time adaptation.

Abstract: Intelligent agents should have the ability to leverage knowledge from previously learned tasks in order to learn new ones quickly and efficiently. Meta-learning approaches have emerged as a popular solution to achieve this. However, meta-reinforcement learning (meta-RL) algorithms have thus far been restricted to simple environments with narrow task distributions. Moreover, the paradigm of pretraining followed by fine-tuning to adapt to new tasks has emerged as a simple yet effective solution in supervised and self-supervised learning. This calls into question the benefits of meta-learning approaches also in reinforcement learning, which typically come at the cost of high complexity. We hence investigate meta-RL approaches in a variety of vision-based benchmarks, including Procgen, RLBench, and Atari, where evaluations are made on completely novel tasks. Our findings show that when meta-learning approaches are evaluated on different tasks (rather than different variations of the same task), multi-task pretraining with fine-tuning on new tasks performs equally as well, or better, than meta-pretraining with meta test-time adaptation. This is encouraging for future research, as multi-task pretraining tends to be simpler and computationally cheaper than meta-RL. From these findings, we advocate for evaluating future meta-RL methods on more challenging tasks and including multi-task pretraining with fine-tuning as a simple, yet strong baseline.