Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

fixed typo in /docs/spinningup/extra_pg_proof2.rst #207

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 2, 2020
Merged

fixed typo in /docs/spinningup/extra_pg_proof2.rst #207

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion docs/spinningup/extra_pg_proof2.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ In this section, we will show that
for the finite-horizon undiscounted return setting. (An analagous result holds in the infinite-horizon discounted case using basically the same proof.)


The proof of this claim depends on the `law of iterated expectations`_. First, let's rewrite the expression for the policy gradient, starting from the reward-to-go form (using the notation :math:`\hat{R}_t = \sum_{t'=t}^T R(s_t, a_t, s_{t+1})` to help shorten things):
The proof of this claim depends on the `law of iterated expectations`_. First, let's rewrite the expression for the policy gradient, starting from the reward-to-go form (using the notation :math:`\hat{R}_t = \sum_{t'=t}^T R(s_t', a_t', s_{t'+1})` to help shorten things):

.. math::

Expand Down