There are reinforcement learning scenarios---e.g., in medicine---where we are compelled to be as confident as possible that a policy change will result in an improvement before implementing it. In such scenarios, we can employ *off-policy evaluation* (OPE). The basic idea of OPE is to record histories of behaviors under the current policy, and then develop an estimate of the quality of a proposed new policy, seeing what the behavior would have been under the new policy. As we are evaluating the policy without actually using it, we have the "off-policy" of OPE. Applying a concentration inequality to the estimate, we derive a confidence interval for the expected quality of the new policy. If the confidence interval lies above that of the current policy, we can change policies with high confidence we will do no harm.

In this work, we focus on the mathematics of this method, by mechanizing the soundness of off-policy evaluation. A natural side effect of the mechanization is both to clarify all the result's mathematical assumptions and preconditions, and to further develop HOL4's library of verified statistical mathematics, including concentration inequalities. Of more significance, the OPE method relies on importance sampling, whose soundness we prove using a measure-theoretic approach. In fact, we generalize the standard result, showing it for contexts comprising both discrete and continuous probability distributions.