Papers › Is Policy Learning Overrated?: Width-Based Planning and Active Learning for Atari

Is Policy Learning Overrated?: Width-Based Planning and Active Learning for Atari

30 Sep 2021arXiv:2109.15310archive 2025-07-28

Benjamin Ayton, Masataro Asai

Width-based planning has shown promising results on Atari 2600 games using pixel input, while using substantially fewer environment interactions than reinforcement learning. Recent width-based approaches have computed feature vectors for each screen using a hand designed feature set or a variational autoencoder trained on game screens (VAE-IW), and prune screens that do not have novel features during the search. We propose Olive (Online-VAE-IW), which updates the VAE features online using active learning to maximize the utility of screens observed during planning. Experimental results in 55 Atari games demonstrate that it outperforms Rollout-IW by 42-to-11 and VAE-IW by 32-to-20. Moreover, Olive outperforms existing work based on policy-learning (π-IW, DQN) trained with 100x training budget by 30-to-22 and 31-to-17, and a state of the art data-efficient reinforcement learning (EfficientZero) trained with the same training budget and ran with 1.8x planning budget by 18-to-7 in Atari 100k benchmark, with no policy learning at all. The source code is available at github.com/ibm/atari-active-learning .

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

8 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 8 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 8 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from ibm/atari-active-learning. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections