Papers › Benchmarking Potential Based Rewards for Learning Humanoid Locomotion

Benchmarking Potential Based Rewards for Learning Humanoid Locomotion

19 Jul 2023arXiv:2307.10142archive 2025-07-28

Se Hwan Jeon, Steve Heim, Charles Khazoom, Sangbae Kim

The main challenge in developing effective reinforcement learning (RL) pipelines is often the design and tuning the reward functions. Well-designed shaping reward can lead to significantly faster learning. Naively formulated rewards, however, can conflict with the desired behavior and result in overfitting or even erratic performance if not properly tuned. In theory, the broad class of potential based reward shaping (PBRS) can help guide the learning process without affecting the optimal policy. Although several studies have explored the use of potential based reward shaping to accelerate learning convergence, most have been limited to grid-worlds and low-dimensional systems, and RL in robotics has predominantly relied on standard forms of reward shaping. In this paper, we benchmark standard forms of shaping with PBRS for a humanoid robot. We find that in this high-dimensional system, PBRS has only marginal benefits in convergence speed. However, the PBRS reward terms are significantly more robust to scaling than typical reward shaping approaches, and thus easier to tune.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

se-hwan/pbrs-humanoid officialmentioned in paperpytorch report

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

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

BenchmarkingReinforcement Learning (RL)

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

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