MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945428699 · doi:10.65109/izyj7724

Training Cooperative Agents for Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning

2019· article· en· W2945428699 on OpenAlexaff
Sushrut Bhalla, Sriram Ganapathi Subramanian, Mark Crowley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningComputer scienceScalabilityConvergence (economics)Distributed computingArtificial intelligenceTraining (meteorology)Machine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep Learning and back-propagation has been successfully used to perform centralized training with communication protocols among multiple agents in a cooperative environment. In this paper we present techniques for centralized training of Multi-Agent (Deep) Reinforcement Learning (MARL) using the model-free Deep Q-Network as the baseline model and message sharing between agents. We present a novel, scalable, centralized MARL training technique, which separates the message learning module from the policy module. The separation of these modules helps in faster convergence in complex domains like autonomous driving simulators. A second contribution uses the centrally trained model to bootstrap training of distributed, independent, cooperative agent policies for execution and thus addresses the challenges of noise and communication bottlenecks in real-time communication channels. This paper theoretically and empirically compares our centralized training algorithms to current research in the field of MARL. We also present and release a new OpenAI-Gym environment which can be used for multi-agent research as it simulates multiple autonomous cars driving cooperatively on a highway.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207