Reinforcement learning to choose optimizers

No single optimization method is uniformly best for all problems, and the most suitable optimizer choice can change during a run. Existing approaches that change optimizer during execution typically predetermine part of the strategy: the portfolio is restricted to one algorithm class, the switch occurs once at a fixed time, or the frequency of decisions is treated as a hyperparameter rather than a learned one. We introduce "Reinforcement Learning to Choose Optimizers", which formulates the optimization algorithm choice as a sequential decision-making problem. At each decision, a recurrent policy reads the current run state and decides both which optimizer should be used next and for how long. The portfolio includes both gradient-based and derivative-free optimizers, and each switch passes on the current best solution and a representative step size. A context proxy conditions a gating network over expert heads, and training employs a decoupled actor-critic whose return is expressed in the same empirical runtime distribution metric used at evaluation. Training tasks and portfolio are designed jointly so that no optimizer dominates. On unseen problems, the learned policy outperforms every portfolio optimizer at all but the smallest budgets, and it remains robust under distribution shift.

Let it Cook: Learning to Wait in Sequential Decision Making

In sequential decision making, an agent typically observes its environment and acts at every timestep. However, such active participation may not always be necessary; tasks such as brewing coffee include periods that are served equally well by letting the environment evolve without constant monitoring and control. During such periods, the agent could simply wait to conserve its resources, or redirect its attention to another task. We capitalize on these opportunities by training a "waiting policy" that decides where and how long to wait. This involves forgoing sensing to commit to a wait action, representing a deliberate pause for a set number of timesteps. We formalize "learning to wait" as minimizing the frequency of sensing and decision making without sacrificing task performance (e.g., the total amount of time to complete a task). To train a waiting policy, we propose an approach that employs reinforcement learning with lexicographically ordered objectives. In experiments across 4 discrete-state household tasks and 3 continuous-state environments, we show that our approach successfully learns waiting behaviors, and can adapt pre-trained policies to wait where appropriate. While different tasks permit different amounts of waiting without sacrificing task performance, our approach consistently finds solutions with significant waiting, sometimes waiting for over 50 percent of the task duration.

Breaking Feedback-Blindness: Utility-Augmented Transformer for Sequential Decision Making

Sequential decision making in non-stationary and partially observable environments requires rapid adaptation to latent regime changes. However, existing Transformer decision models face a structural bottleneck in the retrieval mechanism: even when reward is used for training or exposed as an input token, attention retrieval remains primarily driven by observation-derived similarity. We formalize this limitation as feedback-blind retrieval, and formally show that, on feedback-informative tasks, observation-equivalent histories with different action-reward outcomes cannot be distinguished by any observation-only attention, resulting in suboptimal choice. To address this mismatch, we propose the Utility-Augmented Transformer (UAT), a new feedback-conditioned retrieval attention architecture in which a compact utility state modulates the query, key, and value projections, allowing action-reward history to directly alter context retrieval during the forward pass. UAT also enjoys an exact zero-gate degradation property that recovers the Vanilla Transformer when feedback is uninformative. Under finite-horizon compactness and Lipschitz assumptions, we prove that UAT strictly enlarges the observation-only Transformer class and can uniformly approximate feedback-dependent decision maps. Across four non-stationary benchmarks: synthetic navigation with hidden goal shifts, non-stationary sepsis treatment, cross-market portfolio allocation, and delayed-feedback recommendation, UAT consistently improves performance over observation-only, test-time adaptation, and input-level feedback baselines, with particularly large gains in noisier regimes that require stronger adaptation.

Maturing Markov Decision Processes: Decision Making under Increasing Information and Shrinking Action Sets

Sequential decision problems often exhibit an asymmetric evolution of information and decision flexibility: as a decision cycle unfolds, the agent receives richer information while feasible actions expire due to operational cutoffs, commitments, or resource constraints. Standard MDP formulations typically flatten this structure into stage-dependent state descriptions and action masks, thereby obscuring the nested information--action asymmetry that determines which decisions are urgent and which can be deferred. We introduce Maturing Markov Decision Processes (MMDPs), a formulation built around this information--action asymmetry. We characterize one of its key consequences through an expiring-action priority principle, which identifies the actions that must be resolved before the next stage. Motivated by this structure, we develop a structure-aware reinforcement learning framework with stage-aware policy design, expiring-action abstraction, and search-augmented learning with distillation. Experiments on a controlled multi-supplier replenishment problem, simplified cash-management environments of increasing complexity, and a production-scale simulator show that explicitly modeling this asymmetry improves learning efficiency and becomes increasingly valuable as decision problems scale.

Mind the Sim-to-Real Gap & Think Like a Scientist

Suppose a planner has a pre-trained simulator of a sequential decision problem and the option to run real experiments in the field. The simulator is cheap to query but inherits confounding and drift from its calibration data. Experimentation is unbiased but consumes one real unit per trial. We study when, and how, the planner should supplement the simulator with experiments. We give three results. First, an extended simulation lemma decomposes the simulator's value error into a calibration--deployment shift that randomization can identify and a parametric residual that no further interaction can reduce. Second, the value gap between the simulator-optimal policy and the optimum splits into a local component, on states the deployed policy already visits, and a reachability component, on states it does not. The reachability component stays bounded away from zero at any horizon under purely passive learning. Third, we propose Fisher-SEP, a simulation-aided experimental policy (SEP) that minimizes the posterior predictive variance of a target policy's value, with reward-only and transition-only specializations. Two case studies illustrate the regimes. In a vending-machine supply chain, front-loaded experimentation overtakes posterior updating once the horizon is long enough to amortize the pilot. In an HIV mobile-testing example with a corridor that separates a well-surveilled region from a poorly-surveilled one, only designed exploration reaches the poorly-surveilled region.