clean up text

This commit is contained in:
andrew-luo1
2024-04-23 08:16:38 +02:00
parent 938a62f476
commit a8aa15af4d
+1 -1
View File
@@ -1396,7 +1396,7 @@
"source": [ "source": [
"We see that PPO struggles to learn locomotion in this setup, even with over 10x the number of simulator steps. \n", "We see that PPO struggles to learn locomotion in this setup, even with over 10x the number of simulator steps. \n",
"\n", "\n",
"Rather than indicating a shortcoming of PPO, this study demonstrates a policy-learning setup that effectively leverages FoPG methods. FoPG's perform well here because it involves learning small, accurate perturbations from a good baseline - optimizing to the local minima in a deep valley. FoPG's are precise enough to guide these perturbations using nuanced reward signals, such as our foot placement spline.\n", "Rather than indicating a shortcoming of PPO, this study demonstrates a policy-learning setup that effectively leverages FoPG methods. It involves learning small, accurate perturbations from a good baseline - optimizing to the local minima in a deep valley. FoPG's are precise enough to guide these perturbations using nuanced reward signals, such as our foot placement spline.\n",
"\n", "\n",
"In contrast, RL algorithms such as PPO benefit from [policy-learning setups](https://colab.research.google.com/github/google-deepmind/mujoco/blob/main/mjx/tutorial.ipynb) that have less structured rewards. Unlike FoPG methods, they [benefit greatly](https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/scirobotics.adg1462) from sparse, non-differentiable rewards such as a large penalty for falling." "In contrast, RL algorithms such as PPO benefit from [policy-learning setups](https://colab.research.google.com/github/google-deepmind/mujoco/blob/main/mjx/tutorial.ipynb) that have less structured rewards. Unlike FoPG methods, they [benefit greatly](https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/scirobotics.adg1462) from sparse, non-differentiable rewards such as a large penalty for falling."
] ]