user: text: Write a concise one-sentence TLDR summary of the scientific paper content below.

Title: ES-MAML: Simple Hessian-Free Meta Learning

Paper content:
We introduce ES-MAML, a new framework for solving the model agnostic meta learning (MAML) problem based on Evolution Strategies (ES).
Existing algorithms for MAML are based on policy gradients, and incur significant difficulties when attempting to estimate second derivatives using backpropagation on stochastic policies.
We show how ES can be applied to MAML to obtain an algorithm which avoids the problem of estimating second derivatives, and is also conceptually simple and easy to implement.
Moreover, ES-MAML can handle new types of nonsmooth adaptation operators, and other techniques for improving performance and estimation of ES methods become applicable.
We show empirically that ES-MAML is competitive with existing methods and often yields better adaptation with fewer queries.
Meta-learning is a paradigm in machine learning that aims to develop models and training algorithms which can quickly adapt to new tasks and data.
Our focus in this paper is on meta-learning in reinforcement learning (RL) , where data efficiency is of paramount importance because gathering new samples often requires costly simulations or interactions with the real world.
A popular technique for RL meta-learning is Model Agnostic Meta Learning (MAML) (Finn et al., 2017; , a model for training an agent which can quickly adapt to new and unknown tasks by performing one (or a few) gradient updates in the new environment.
We provide a formal description of MAML in Section 2.
MAML has proven to be successful for many applications.
However, implementing and running MAML continues to be challenging.
One major complication is that the standard version of MAML requires estimating second derivatives of the RL reward function, which is difficult when using backpropagation on stochastic policies; indeed, the original implementation of MAML (Finn et al., 2017) did so incorrectly, which spurred the development of unbiased higher-order estimators (DiCE, (Foerster et al., 2018) ) and further analysis of the credit assignment mechanism in MAML (Rothfuss et al., 2019) .
Another challenge arises from the high variance inherent in policy gradient methods, which can be ameliorated through control variates such as in T-MAML (Liu et al., 2019) , through careful adaptive hyperparameter tuning (Behl et al., 2019; Antoniou et al., 2019) and learning rate annealing (Loshchilov & Hutter, 2017) .
To avoid these issues, we propose an alternative approach to MAML based on Evolution Strategies (ES), as opposed to the policy gradient underlying previous MAML algorithms.
We provide a detailed discussion of ES in Section 3.1.
ES has several advantages:
1. Our zero-order formulation of ES-MAML (Section 3.2, Algorithm 3) does not require estimating any second derivatives.
This dodges the many issues caused by estimating second derivatives with backpropagation on stochastic policies (see Section 2 for details).
2. ES is conceptually much simpler than policy gradients, which also translates to ease of implementation.
It does not use backpropagation, so it can be run on CPUs only.
3. ES is highly flexible with different adaptation operators (Section 3.3).
4. ES allows us to use deterministic policies, which can be safer when doing adaptation (Section 4.3).
ES is also capable of learning linear and other compact policies (Section 4.2).
On the point (4), a feature of ES algorithms is that exploration takes place in the parameter space.
Whereas policy gradient methods are primarily motivated by interactions with the environment through randomized actions, ES is driven by optimization in high-dimensional parameter spaces with an expensive querying model.
In the context of MAML, the notions of "exploration" and "task identification" have thus been shifted to the parameter space instead of the action space.
This distinction plays a key role in the stability of the algorithm.
One immediate implication is that we can use deterministic policies, unlike policy gradients which is based on stochastic policies.
Another difference is that ES uses only the total reward and not the individual state-action pairs within each episode.
While this may appear to be a weakness, since less information is being used, we find in practice that it seems to lead to more stable training profiles.
This paper is organized as follows.
In Section 2, we give a formal definition of MAML, and discuss related works.
In Section 3, we introduce Evolutionary Strategies and show how ES can be applied to create a new framework for MAML.
In Section 4, we present numerical experiments, highlighting the topics of exploration (Section 4.1), the utility of compact architectures (Section 4.2), the stability of deterministic policies (Section 4.3), and comparisons against existing MAML algorithms in the few-shot regime (Section 4.4).
Additional material can be found in the Appendix.
We have presented a new framework for MAML based on ES algorithms.
The ES-MAML approach avoids the problems of Hessian estimation which necessitated complicated alterations in PG-MAML and is straightforward to implement.
ES-MAML is flexible in the choice of adaptation operators, and can be augmented with general improvements to ES, along with more exotic adaptation operators.
In particular, ES-MAML can be paired with nonsmooth adaptation operators such as hill climbing, which we found empirically to yield better exploratory behavior and better performance on sparse-reward environments.
ES-MAML performs well with linear or compact deterministic policies, which is an advantage when adapting if the state dynamics are possibly unstable.
but slightly worse than the full PG-MAML, and does not report comparisons with and without the Hessian on RL MAML.
(Rothfuss et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2019) argue for the importance of the second-order terms in proper credit assignment, but use heavily modified estimators (LVC, control variates; see Section 2) in their experiments, so the performance is not directly comparable to the 'naive' estimator in Algorithm 4.
Our interpretation is that Algorithm 4 has high variance, making the Hessian estimates inaccurate, which can slow training on relatively 'easier' tasks like ForwardBackward walking but possibly increase the exploration on four corners.
We also compare FO-NoHessian against Algorithm 3 on Forward-Backward HalfCheetah and Ant in Figure A2 .
In this experiment, the two methods ran on servers with different number of workers available, so we measure the score by the total number of rollouts.
We found that FO-NoHessian was slightly faster than Algorithm 3 when measured by rollouts on Ant, but FO-NoHessian had notably poor performance when the number of queries was low (K = 5) on HalfCheetah, and failed to reach similar scores as the others even after running for many more rollouts.

assistant: text: We provide a new framework for MAML in the ES/blackbox setting, and show that it allows deterministic and linear policies, better exploration, and non-differentiable adaptation operators.