Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Greedy policy improvement and finite policy-iteration termination

Statement

Let a finite MDP and 0≤γ<1 be fixed, and let V∗ denote the unique fixed point of T∗. If S=∅, the statewise claims below are vacuous and the policy iteration procedure returns the unique empty policy after one evaluation, without Choice. If S≠∅, assume the Axiom of Choice. For a stationary policy π, let Vπ be its expected discounted state value. For a deterministic policy σ, define its associated stationary policy by σ^(a∣s)=1 if a=σ(s) and 0 otherwise, and interpret Tσ and Vσ as Tσ^ and Vσ^.

QV(s,a)=r(s,a)+γ∑s′∈SP(s′∣s,a)V(s′).

If a deterministic policy π′ chooses an action maximizing QVπ(s,a) at every state, then Vπ′(s)≥Vπ(s) for every s. If (Tπ′Vπ)(s)>Vπ(s) at any state, the value inequality is strict at some state.

For exact finite policy iteration, supply an initial deterministic policy and a finite ordered list of the actions at each state; evaluate each policy at its exact Bellman fixed point; retain the current action whenever it is already greedy; otherwise choose the earliest maximizing action in the supplied list. Every changed policy then strictly improves the value at some state and weakly improves it at every state. The procedure makes at most Ndet−1 changes, where Ndet is the finite number of deterministic policies, and terminates at a deterministic policy whose value is V∗; this value dominates the value of every stationary policy.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite MDP, 0≤γ<1, a stationary policy π, and (for policy iteration) the stated exact-evaluation procedure and finite action listings. In the nonempty-state branch, assume the Axiom of Choice.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: Choice is required by the path-space chain construction used for expected discounted values.

[F1]

Finite Markov decision process with joint reward-transition law and Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable: S and each A(s) are finite; π(⋅∣s) and P(⋅∣s,a) are probability distributions.

[F2]

Discounted returns and policy values in a finite MDP: Vπ(s) is the expected discounted return from initial state s under Choice.

[F4]

Policy Bellman operator and Bellman optimality operator: TπV is the π-weighted average of QV(s,a), while T∗V(s)=max⁡a∈A(s)QV(s,a).

[F5]

Finite-MDP Bellman operators are gamma contractions with unique fixed points: every Tμ and T∗ is a contraction with constant γ and has a unique fixed point.

[F6]

Completeness of the sup metric on finite-state value functions: the metric d∞ on RS is complete.

[F7]

A contraction of a nonempty complete metric space into itself has exactly one fixed point, the limit of the iterates from any starting point: iterates of each such contraction from any initial value converge to its unique fixed point.

[F8]

Exact finite policy iteration with retained greedy actions: evaluation is exact, the current action is retained whenever it maximizes Q, and any other tie is resolved by the supplied finite action list.

[F9]

Every nonempty finite set of reals has a maximum and a minimum: every nonempty finite set of real action values has an attained maximum.

[F10]

Limits preserve non-strict inequalities: an eventual non-strict inequality between convergent real sequences holds between their limits.

[F11]

The principle of mathematical induction: a property true at the first index and preserved at each successor holds at all natural indices.

Proof

1.1givenA1F1F2F3F4F9algebra

If S=∅, all statewise inequalities are vacuous and the unique empty policy has no update; assume for the remaining steps that S≠∅. [A1] supplies the choice assumption for the path-law value in [F2], and [F3] gives its Bellman fixed-point identity. For each state s, [F3] and [F4] give Vπ(s)=∑a∈A(s)π(a∣s)QVπ(s,a)≤max⁡a∈A(s)QVπ(s,a)=(T∗Vπ)(s). The inequality holds because a probability-weighted average of finitely many real numbers is at most their attained maximum [F1, F9].

1.2givenF1F4algebra

For every stationary policy ν, the operator Tν is monotone: if U(s)≤W(s) for every s, then each coefficient ν(a∣s)P(s′∣s,a) is nonnegative and γ≥0, so (TνU)(s)≤(TνW)(s) for every s.

2.1step 1.1F4

If π′ is greedy, its action attains that maximum at every state, so (Tπ′Vπ)(s)=(T∗Vπ)(s)≥Vπ(s) for all s.

3.1step 2.1step 1.2F11construct

Define U0=Vπ and Un+1=Tπ′Un. Step 2.1 gives U0≤U1 pointwise; if Un≤Un+1 then step 1.2 gives Un+1=Tπ′Un≤Tπ′Un+1=Un+2. By [F11], (Un) is pointwise nondecreasing.

4.1step 3.1F3F5F6F7F10construct

The zero function belongs to RS, so (RS,d∞) is nonempty; [F6] makes it complete. By [F5], Tπ′ is a contraction, so Banach iteration [F7] makes Un converge in d∞ to its unique fixed point. By [F3] and uniqueness in [F5], that fixed point is Vπ′. Since ∣Un(s)−Vπ′(s)∣≤d∞(Un,Vπ′) for every s, the convergence is coordinatewise; from Un≥U0=Vπ, [F10] yields Vπ′≥Vπ pointwise. This proves the first value comparison.

4.2step 3.1F10algebra

If (Tπ′Vπ)(s0)>Vπ(s0), then U1(s0)>U0(s0). Step 3.1 makes Un(s0)≥U1(s0) for every n≥1; passing to the limit with [F10] gives Vπ′(s0)≥U1(s0)>Vπ(s0).

5.1givenF3F4F5F8F9step 4.1step 4.2

Consider one update in the stated policy-iteration procedure. Exact evaluation returns Vπk because it is the unique fixed point of Tπk by [F3] and [F5]. At each state the updated action maximizes QVπk; if the old action is already a maximizer it is retained, and otherwise its value is strictly below the attained maximum. Therefore Tπk+1Vπk≥Vπk at all states, with strict inequality wherever the policy changed. Steps 4.1–4.2 show that every changed policy weakly improves all state values and strictly improves at least one.

6.1givenF1F8F12step 5.1

List the finite states as s1,…,sn and each action set as A(si)={ai,1,…,ai,mi}. A deterministic policy is one tuple of indices (j1,…,jn) with 1≤ji≤mi, so the set of such policies is a finite Cartesian product by [F12]; for S=∅ it is the singleton empty product. By step 5.1, each changed iteration strictly increases some coordinate and never decreases any, so no policy can recur, since a repeated policy has the same unique exact value vector. Hence at most Ndet−1 changes occur and the procedure terminates.

7.1step 6.1F3F4F5F8

At termination, the update leaves every action unchanged, which by [F8] means the terminal deterministic policy is greedy with respect to its exact value Vπ. Thus TπVπ=T∗Vπ by [F4]; with [F3], this says T∗Vπ=Vπ, so uniqueness in [F5] gives Vπ=V∗.

8.1step 7.1step 1.2step 4.1F1F3F4F5F6F7F10∎

For any stationary policy μ, TμV∗≤T∗V∗=V∗ because the former is a probability-weighted average of the same action values. Iterating W0=V∗, Wn+1=TμWn, monotonicity as in step 1.2 makes Wn nonincreasing. The domain is nonempty by step 4.1 and complete by [F6], so [F5]–[F7] make these iterates converge to the unique fixed point of Tμ, which equals Vμ by [F3]. Since ∣Wn(s)−Vμ(s)∣≤d∞(Wn,Vμ) for every s, convergence is coordinatewise; [F10] gives Vμ≤V∗. Therefore the terminal policy's value dominates every stationary policy.

Remarks

The path-law interpretation of Vπ carries the stated Choice assumption. The weighted-average inequalities, finite maxima, and finite policy iteration after action lists are supplied use no additional choice principle.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

78 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources