You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 16, 2022. It is now read-only.
in policy loss you calculate the usual policy gradient for agent, in value loss you calculate loss for the critic. They seem to be independent, the critic does not affect the agent at all. Shouldn't returns for policy loss be calculated with values from critic or something like that?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@hawkeoni Sorry for the delayed response. You are correct, the two are independent of each other, which is an error. I believe you're right, in that the policy loss should be calculate with the predicted values. I'll look into fixing this asap.
I believe this is mathematically correct, however I cannot seem to get a good set of hyperparameters that will make this notebook train. I guess this is why people always use the "A2C" actor critic version. Although technically my notebook isn't A2C at all. I'll have to have a think about how to re-arrange these notebooks for them to make sense.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Hello, Ben!
Thank you for a great tutorial series. I have a question regarding your actor-critic notebook.
In function
update_policy
in policy loss you calculate the usual policy gradient for agent, in value loss you calculate loss for the critic. They seem to be independent, the critic does not affect the agent at all. Shouldn't returns for policy loss be calculated with values from critic or something like that?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: