2
$\begingroup$

I've noticed that when modelling a continuous action space, the default thing to do is to estimate a mean and a variance where each is parameterized by a neural network or some other model.

I also often see that it is one network $\theta$ models both. The REINFORCE objective can be written as

$$\nabla \mathcal{J}(\theta) = \mathbb{E}_{\pi} [\nabla_\theta \log \pi(a_t|s_t) * R_t] $$

For discrete action space this makes sense since the output of the network is determined by a softmax. However, if we explicitly model the output of the network as a Gaussian, then the gradient of the log likelihood is of a different form,

$$\pi_\theta(a_t|s_t) = Normal(\mu_\theta(s_t), \Sigma_\theta(s_t))$$

and the log is:

$$\log \pi_\theta(a_t | s_t) = -\frac{1}{2} (a_t-\mu_\theta)^\top \Sigma^{-1}_\theta(a_t-\mu_\theta) + \log 2 \pi \det({\Sigma_\theta})$$

In the slides provided here (slide 18): http://www0.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/d.silver/web/Teaching_files/pg.pdf

IF the variance is held constant, then we can solve this analytically:

$$\nabla \log \pi_\theta(a_t|s_t) = (a_t - \mu_\theta) \Sigma^{-1} \phi(s)$$

But, are things always modelled assuming a constant variance? If it's not constant then we have to account for the inverse of the covariance matrix as well as the determinant?

I've taken a look at code online and from what I've seen, most of them assume the variance is constant.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I just wanted to confirm that reinforcement learning is well within the scope of our site, as well as that of ai.stackexchange.com; despite the impression that may have been given by a now-deleted comment. (I've undeleted this question even though you've asked it here.) $\endgroup$ – Scortchi - Reinstate Monica Feb 13 '19 at 14:45

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.