Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[compute_observations bug] correctness of self.fingertip_another_pos #37

Open
Bariona opened this issue Dec 11, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Comments

@Bariona
Copy link

Bariona commented Dec 11, 2023

Dear authors,

In the shadow hand task's compute_observations() func (e.g. link), there is a code block written as:

self.fingertip_state = self.rigid_body_states[:, self.fingertip_handles][:, :, 0:13]
self.fingertip_pos = self.rigid_body_states[:, self.fingertip_handles][:, :, 0:3]
self.fingertip_another_state = self.rigid_body_states[:, self.fingertip_another_handles][:, :, 0:13]
self.fingertip_another_pos = self.rigid_body_states[:, self.fingertip_another_handles][:, :, 0:3]

I think fingertip_another_handles = fingertip_handles, which might lead to the incorrect observation (i.e., the self.fingertip_pos = self.fingertip_another_pos will always holds true)

The reason is that self.fingertip_another_handles and self.fingertip_handles 's definitions are:

self.fingertip_handles = [self.gym.find_asset_rigid_body_index(shadow_hand_asset, name) for name in self.fingertips]
self.fingertip_another_handles = [self.gym.find_asset_rigid_body_index(shadow_hand_another_asset, name) for name in self.a_fingertips]

I think here since their handles all get gym.from find_asset_rigid_body() and the asset is basically the same, self.fingertip_another_handles = self.fingertip_handles.

As I output the variables, my assumption holds.
Could you give me some tips?

ps: I love your work very much!!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant