Papers › Benchmarking Deep Reinforcement Learning for Continuous Control
Benchmarking Deep Reinforcement Learning for Continuous Control
Yan Duan, Xi Chen, Rein Houthooft, John Schulman, Pieter Abbeel
Recently, researchers have made significant progress combining the advances in deep learning for learning feature representations with reinforcement learning. Some notable examples include training agents to play Atari games based on raw pixel data and to acquire advanced manipulation skills using raw sensory inputs. However, it has been difficult to quantify progress in the domain of continuous control due to the lack of a commonly adopted benchmark. In this work, we present a benchmark suite of continuous control tasks, including classic tasks like cart-pole swing-up, tasks with very high state and action dimensionality such as 3D humanoid locomotion, tasks with partial observations, and tasks with hierarchical structure. We report novel findings based on the systematic evaluation of a range of implemented reinforcement learning algorithms. Both the benchmark and reference implementations are released at https://github.com/rllab/rllab in order to facilitate experimental reproducibility and to encourage adoption by other researchers.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="1604.06778")
Code
Syntology Ran 0 of 4 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 4 have no recorded run.
By repository: community (archive-listed): 4 samples from 1 repository, 0 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
15 repositories listed; official and paper-mentioned ones first.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
4 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 4 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 4 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from rlworkgroup/garage. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
286b82196c4fe36b · report
4edad3b8d64c574e · report
8574703c48d0d43d · report
8a3741971be6face · report
Tasks
Datasets
Introduced by this paper, per the archive.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Continuous Control | 2D Walker | TRPO | Score | 1353.8 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Acrobot | TRPO | Score | -326 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Acrobot (limited sensors) | TRPO | Score | -83.3 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Acrobot (noisy observations) | TRPO | Score | -149.6 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Acrobot (system identifications) | TRPO | Score | -170.9 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Ant | TRPO | Score | 730.2 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Ant + Gathering | TRPO | Score | -0.4 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Ant + Maze | TRPO | Score | 0 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Cart-Pole Balancing | TRPO | Score | 4869.8 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Cart-Pole Balancing (limited sensors) | TRPO | Score | 960.2 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Cart-Pole Balancing (noisy observations) | TRPO | Score | 606.2 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Cart-Pole Balancing (system identifications) | TRPO | Score | 980.3 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Double Inverted Pendulum | TRPO | Score | 4412.4 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Full Humanoid | TRPO | Score | 287 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Half-Cheetah | TRPO | Score | 1914 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Hopper | TRPO | Score | 1183.3 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Inverted Pendulum | TRPO | Score | 247.2 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Inverted Pendulum (limited sensors) | TRPO | Score | 4.5 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Inverted Pendulum (noisy observations) | TRPO | Score | 10.4 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Inverted Pendulum (system identifications) | TRPO | Score | 14.1 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Mountain Car | TRPO | Score | -61.7 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Mountain Car (limited sensors) | TRPO | Score | -64.2 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Mountain Car (noisy observations) | TRPO | Score | -60.2 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Mountain Car (system identifications) | TRPO | Score | -61.6 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Simple Humanoid | TRPO | Score | 269.7 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Swimmer | TRPO | Score | 96 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Swimmer + Gathering | TRPO | Score | 0 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Continuous Control | Swimmer + Maze | TRPO | Score | 0 | #1 of 1 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections