-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 235
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Actions exploration #38
Comments
Testing this modification to hypersearch.py, had to clear the runs database so it's going to be a bit before I can tell if it affected anything.
First time tweaking the hypers, if there's a better way let me know. UPDATE 08/14/18: The above code is not compatible with v0.2 as-is. The ranges to be searched are valid but the syntax is not compatible with the hyperopt implementation in v0.2. |
This is able to run for v0.2:
Updated 08/19/18 to use use quniform A brief explanation of the parmaters from here: |
Feel free to add in a pull request, or even just commit to master if you feel confident about it |
Going to try and get the values to a little more realistic first before submitting a PR for it. Letting the hypersearch run for a bit so it does it's thing. |
I'm working outside of hypersearch right now so these are probably not ideal parameters. It seems the model becomes a little more flexible to less than perfect parameters (and the random associated with the model's initial state) with actions exploration defined.
https://reinforce.io/blog/introduction-to-tensorforce/
actions_exploration=dict(
type='ornstein_uhlenbeck',
sigma=0.1,
mu=0.0,
theta=0.1
),
these parameters are from the example in the above link and are not optimized
Any benefit to adding parameters for actions exploration to hypersearch?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: