Abstract
Model selection and hyperparameter tuning pose a central challenge in off-policy evaluation (OPE) because estimation errors in fitted $Q$-functions and occupancy ratios cannot be directly evaluated using held-out transition data. Existing Bellman-residual-based validation methods often require auxiliary regressions, while many minimax-based methods require optimization over separate critic classes. We propose pairwise Bellman validation (PBV), a family of penalized Bellman tournament methods that reduces validation to computing held-out sample averages. PBV constructs critics from pairwise candidate differences, on the log scale for occupancy ratios, and selects the candidate with the smallest worst-case penalized score. This construction approximates oracle critics given by $Q$-function errors and log ratios of candidate to true occupancy ratios, whose Bellman and adjoint Bellman moments control estimation error. Critic penalties account for approximation error under candidate-class misspecification. We establish finite-sample oracle inequalities relative to the best available candidate, even under candidate-class misspecification. For $Q$-function selection, unweighted PBV avoids importance weighting but requires a coercivity condition on a quadratic form induced by the Bellman operator. Importance-weighted PBV (IW-PBV) uses marginalized importance weighting to exploit Bellman contraction under the target-policy occupancy measure, avoiding this condition. For occupancy-ratio selection, adjoint PBV (A-PBV) exploits KL contraction of the adjoint Bellman operator to obtain oracle guarantees under the offline data law. On Hopper and DeepOPE, unweighted PBV is competitive with LSTD-Tournament, often achieving higher accuracy on Hopper, while importance weighting can further improve performance under controlled overlap.