Is Q-Learning Minimax Optimal? A Tight Sample Complexity Analysis

Q-learning, which seeks to learn the optimal Q-function of a Markov decision process (MDP) in a model-free fashion, lies at the heart of reinforcement learning. When it comes to the synchronous setting (such that independent samples for all state-action pairs are drawn from a generative model in each iteration), substantial progress has been made recently towards understanding the sample efficiency of Q-learning. Take a $\gamma$-discounted infinite-horizon MDP with state space $\mathcal{S}$ and action space $\mathcal{A}$: to yield an entrywise $\varepsilon$-accurate estimate of the optimal Q-function, state-of-the-art theory for Q-learning proves that a sample size on the order of $\frac{|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}|}{(1-\gamma)^5\varepsilon^{2}}$ is sufficient, which, however, fails to match with the existing minimax lower bound. This gives rise to natural questions: what is the sharp sample complexity of Q-learning? Is Q-learning provably sub-optimal? In this work, we settle these questions by (1) demonstrating that the sample complexity of Q-learning is at most on the order of $\frac{|\mathcal{S}||\mathcal{A}|}{(1-\gamma)^4\varepsilon^2}$ (up to some log factor) for any $0<\varepsilon <1$, and (2) developing a matching lower bound to confirm the sharpness of our result. Our findings unveil both the effectiveness and limitation of Q-learning: its sample complexity matches that of speedy Q-learning without requiring extra computation and storage, albeit still being considerably higher than the minimax lower bound.