Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Reinforcement Learning With Partial Online State Information in POMDPs: Regret Bounds and Limits

  • Ohio State University

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Partially observable Markov decision processes (POMDPs) are a general framework for sequential decision-making under latent state uncertainty, yet learning in POMDPs is intractable in the worst case. Motivated by sensing and probing constraints in practice, we study how much online state information (OSI) is sufficient to enable efficient learning guarantees. We formalize a model in which the learner can query only partial OSI (POSI) during interaction. We first prove an information-theoretic hardness result showing that, for general POMDPs, achieving an ϵ-optimal policy can require sample complexity that is exponential unless full OSI is available. We then identify two structured subclasses that remain learnable under POSI and propose corresponding algorithms with provably efficient performance guarantees. In particular, we establish regret upper bounds with O K dependence on the number of episodes K , together with complementary lower bounds, thereby delineating when POSI suffices for efficient reinforcement learning. Our results highlight a principled separation between intractable and tractable regimes under incomplete online state access and provide new tools for jointly optimizing POSI queries and learning control actions.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)4895-4925
Number of pages31
JournalIEEE Transactions on Information Theory
Volume72
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2026

Keywords

  • information-theoretic lower bounds
  • partial online state information (POSI)
  • Partially observable Markov decision processes (POMDPs)
  • regret bounds
  • reinforcement learning (RL)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Reinforcement Learning With Partial Online State Information in POMDPs: Regret Bounds and Limits'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this