Programming exercises teach the material a lot better than quizzes

The course was cool but needed some more programming assignments.

Very good but slightly outdated/overkill in the age of DQL

it s very interesting course with exellent way to instruct

Excellent in terms of learning the foundations of RL.

There could be more coding examples for each module.

Quite theoretical. But a good base of the concepts.

More elaboration on the maths part will help.

Good, but it just introduce the fundamentals

I wished there were more coding assignments

c

o

u

l

d

b

e

w

i

t

h

m

o

r

e

e

x

a

m

p

l

e

a

n

d

t

e

a

c

h

b

y

c

o

d

i

n

g

it was a bit hard in code assignments

Interesting course.

Good course !

good course

Great

Good!

good

I found this course difficult to get through, even tedious towards the end; this is a fundamentals course after all so it being heavily theoretical was to be expected.

I found the practical assessments challenging and very good for developing the understanding of what had been taught; however one practical in the first week and one in the fourth week was too few. I was longing for the final assignment!

It remains to be seen how relevent this is to the upcoming modules (I do feel that I have a good grounding and understanding of the underlying process so maybe it was a necessary slog). I hope that they are more practical!

Very small observation: the use of bespoke Python packages with the online notebooks was also a bit frustrating. I like to be able to work off line (e.g. in Anaconda) and I also wanted to try and work out some of the challenges in R but without access to the bespoke packages it would have been too involved. I understand that you have a lot of students though and online notebooks are easier to manage.

The instructors are friendly, which creates a pleasant learning atmosphere. However, there is room for improvement in the teaching of mathematical formulas. These are often covered too quickly and not explained sufficiently, making it very difficult to understand. Additionally, I find the constant encouragement to read the book a bit excessive. If reading the book alone is sufficient, there would be no need to attend the course. A more balanced approach between book study and practical explanation in class would be desirable.

Good examples can simplify things greatly. there where several places where an extra step would add value. Some lessons, such as the problem with the trucks could go a little deeper. Assignment grading system is buggy. I spend hours (that I do not have) because I used "transition" as a variable. After I figured this out, I was no longer able to know if other error is due to some other things the Notebook does not like or if there are actual errors. I also posted some questions but never got any response to any of them.

Not much satisfied with the course structure...

To successfully understand and complete this course, you constantly need to refer the reference book.

Most of the students are referring to online courses so that they can learn more efficiently than reading,

any casual book reader can easily complete this course but for the person who like to learn from videos rather than book reading (like me), it was not so great experience.

The content is there and it is good, but teachers lack good teaching skills and lessons feel rushed (Ng lectures come to mind as positive examples of good practices). Also, lessons aren't self-contained, as you need to read the book if you want to get good grades on the tests. I was looking for a smoother experience than the book, not to be told to read the book, which I can do without a course.

I would have learned more if the course had a coding assignment each week, or at least example code available for similar problems. I had a good theoretical understanding of everything we needed to do but very poor practical understanding.

The course did serve as a good introduction to the theory of reinforcement learning, and certainly acts as a good starting point.