Combining Trained Models in Reinforcement Learning

TL;DR

This paper systematically reviews empirical studies on reusing pretrained models in deep reinforcement learning, highlighting patterns, limitations, and the need for standardized benchmarking.

Contribution

It provides a focused, qualitative synthesis of existing research on transfer and ensemble methods in DRL, proposing a provisional independence spectrum for future evaluation.

Findings

Positive results often occur when source and target tasks share structure.

Ensemble and federated methods show promise but are limited in scope.

Comparisons against from-scratch baselines are infrequent, affecting efficiency claims.

Abstract

Deep reinforcement learning (DRL) has delivered strong results in domains such as Atari and Go, but it still suffers from high sample cost and weak transfer beyond the training setting. A common response is to reuse information from previously trained models through transfer, distillation, ensemble methods, or federated training instead of learning each target task from random initialization. The literature on these mechanisms is fragmented, and published comparisons are hard to interpret because tasks, baselines, and compute budgets differ. This paper presents a PRISMA-guided systematic review of empirical studies on pretrained knowledge reuse in DRL. Starting from 589 records retrieved from IEEE Xplore, the ACM Digital Library, and citation tracing, we screened 570 unique records and assessed 89 full texts. After applying the final eligibility criteria, 15 empirical studies remained in the main synthesis. We analyzed them qualitatively across three factors: source-target similarity, diversity among reused models, and the fairness of comparisons against from-scratch baselines. Three patterns recur across the surviving corpus. First, positive results are concentrated in settings where source and target tasks share substantial structure or where the method includes an explicit gating or alignment mechanism. Second, evidence for ensembles and federated aggregation is promising but sparse and mostly limited to narrow settings. Third, compute-matched comparisons are rare, which weakens claims about efficiency gains over stronger single-agent baselines. The paper contributes a narrower and internally consistent review scope, a study-level synthesis of empirical evidence, and a provisional independence spectrum that should be treated as a hypothesis for future benchmarking rather than a validated metric.