4 ms·
Thanks, I can't write a full reply now (need to think) but for some reason my intuition was, let's say you have a constant punishment signal, and a timer, and i
by ffwd 3y ago
Thanks, I can't write a full reply now (need to think) but for some reason my intuition was, let's say you have a constant punishment signal, and a timer, and if it doesn't solve whatever problem by the time the timer goes down, then it has to find the optimal action set, and if it reaches a goal earlier than the timer then it has to weigh that solution stronger? Like at least how I see with organisms it's about finding the optimal use of the limbs in order to solve an ongoing problem/goal state, and if you accumulate specific actions (instead of one network that optimizes one "space"), and different types of goal states, then it has to find the optimal set of actions to reach the different goals, it just seemed more efficient. But this is off the cuff a bit right now.
Edit: i think what i'm thinking of are two "global" numbers. A "closer to the goal" number (higher when closer), and a countdown timer, and then it has to maximize those within the above setting
- wegfawefgawefg 3y agoif you only have negative rewards the bot will usually stop picking any actions at all. bc they all have reward values too low. sometimes a big negstive reward can scare it away from ever pressing the scary button ever again