<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Constrained Policy Optimization · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1705.10528/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1705.10528/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Constrained Policy Optimization — mentioned by gwern</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14477206</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1705.10528:14477206</guid><pubDate>Sat, 03 Jun 2017 16:51:35 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; It would be nice to be able to define a prior that puts very low to no probability on actions that are not physically possible. This would constrain the search space considerably. But it&amp;#x27;s not really clear how to do this with neural nets. I dunno, I can think of several ways off the top of my head: 1. put large negative rewards on impossible actions; 2. only compute Q-values for feasible actions (just because DQN computes Q-values for a hardcoded set of actions doesn&amp;#x27;t mean you have to); 3. use Achiam&amp;#x27;s &amp;quot;Constrained Policy Optimization&amp;quot; https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.10528 ; 4. reparameterize…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1705.10528/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item></channel></rss>
