Comparative Analysis of A3C and PPO Algorithms in Reinforcement Learning: A Survey on General Environments

IF 3.4 3区 计算机科学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS IEEE Access Pub Date : 2024-10-02 DOI:10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3472473
Alberto del Rio;David Jimenez;Javier Serrano
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of A3C and PPO Algorithms in Reinforcement Learning: A Survey on General Environments","authors":"Alberto del Rio;David Jimenez;Javier Serrano","doi":"10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3472473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research article presents a comparison between two mainstream Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) algorithms, Asynchronous Advantage Actor-Critic (A3C) and Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO), in the context of two diverse environments: CartPole and Lunar Lander. DRL algorithms are widely known for their effectiveness in training agents to navigate complex environments and achieve optimal policies. Nevertheless, a methodical assessment of their effectiveness in various settings is crucial for comprehending their advantages and disadvantages. In this study, we conduct experiments on the CartPole and Lunar Lander environments using both A3C and PPO algorithms. We compare their performance in terms of convergence speed and stability. Our results indicate that A3C typically achieves quicker training times, but exhibits greater instability in reward values. Conversely, PPO demonstrates a more stable training process at the expense of longer execution times. An evaluation of the environment is needed in terms of algorithm selection, based on specific application needs, balancing between training time and stability. A3C is ideal for applications requiring rapid training, while PPO is better suited for those prioritizing training stability.","PeriodicalId":13079,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Access","volume":"12 ","pages":"146795-146806"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=10703056","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Access","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10703056/","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This research article presents a comparison between two mainstream Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) algorithms, Asynchronous Advantage Actor-Critic (A3C) and Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO), in the context of two diverse environments: CartPole and Lunar Lander. DRL algorithms are widely known for their effectiveness in training agents to navigate complex environments and achieve optimal policies. Nevertheless, a methodical assessment of their effectiveness in various settings is crucial for comprehending their advantages and disadvantages. In this study, we conduct experiments on the CartPole and Lunar Lander environments using both A3C and PPO algorithms. We compare their performance in terms of convergence speed and stability. Our results indicate that A3C typically achieves quicker training times, but exhibits greater instability in reward values. Conversely, PPO demonstrates a more stable training process at the expense of longer execution times. An evaluation of the environment is needed in terms of algorithm selection, based on specific application needs, balancing between training time and stability. A3C is ideal for applications requiring rapid training, while PPO is better suited for those prioritizing training stability.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
强化学习中的 A3C 和 PPO 算法对比分析:一般环境调查
本研究文章介绍了两种主流深度强化学习(DRL)算法--异步优势行为批判(A3C)和近端策略优化(PPO)--在两种不同环境下的比较:CartPole 和月球着陆器。DRL 算法因其在训练代理在复杂环境中导航和实现最优策略方面的有效性而广为人知。然而,有条不紊地评估其在各种环境中的有效性对于理解其优缺点至关重要。在本研究中,我们使用 A3C 和 PPO 算法在 CartPole 和 Lunar Lander 环境中进行了实验。我们比较了它们在收敛速度和稳定性方面的性能。我们的结果表明,A3C 通常能实现更快的训练时间,但在奖励值方面表现出更大的不稳定性。相反,PPO 的训练过程更稳定,但执行时间更长。在算法选择方面,需要根据具体的应用需求对环境进行评估,在训练时间和稳定性之间取得平衡。A3C 非常适合需要快速训练的应用,而 PPO 则更适合优先考虑训练稳定性的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
IEEE Access
IEEE Access COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMSENGIN-ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
6673
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: IEEE Access® is a multidisciplinary, open access (OA), applications-oriented, all-electronic archival journal that continuously presents the results of original research or development across all of IEEE''s fields of interest. IEEE Access will publish articles that are of high interest to readers, original, technically correct, and clearly presented. Supported by author publication charges (APC), its hallmarks are a rapid peer review and publication process with open access to all readers. Unlike IEEE''s traditional Transactions or Journals, reviews are "binary", in that reviewers will either Accept or Reject an article in the form it is submitted in order to achieve rapid turnaround. Especially encouraged are submissions on: Multidisciplinary topics, or applications-oriented articles and negative results that do not fit within the scope of IEEE''s traditional journals. Practical articles discussing new experiments or measurement techniques, interesting solutions to engineering. Development of new or improved fabrication or manufacturing techniques. Reviews or survey articles of new or evolving fields oriented to assist others in understanding the new area.
期刊最新文献
A New Texture Aware—Seed Demand Enhanced Simple Non-Iterative Clustering (ESNIC) Segmentation Algorithm for Efficient Land Use and Land Cover Mapping on Remote Sensing Images Corrections to “A Systematic Literature Review of the IoT in Agriculture–Global Adoption, Innovations, Security Privacy Challenges” A Progressive-Assisted Object Detection Method Based on Instance Attention Ensemble Balanced Nested Dichotomy Fuzzy Models for Software Requirement Risk Prediction Enhancing Burn Severity Assessment With Deep Learning: A Comparative Analysis and Computational Efficiency Evaluation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1