However, I find the paper written in a way assuming readers very familiar with related concept and algorithms in reinforcement learning	['non', 'non', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con', 'con']	paper quality