MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093099641 · doi:10.22215/etd/2017-11788

On Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning in Matrix, Stochastic and Differential Games

2017· dissertation· en· W3093099641 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGuidance and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNash equilibriumReinforcement learningBest responseComputer scienceConvergence (economics)Mathematical optimizationEpsilon-equilibriumPursuerSolution conceptMathematicsAlgorithmMathematical economicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this thesis, we investigate reinforcement learning algorithms on matrix, stochastic, and differential games. In matrix and stochastic games, the states and actions are represented in continuous domains. We propose two decentralized multi-agent reinforcement learning algorithms to solve the problem of learning in matrix and stochastic games when the learning agent has only minimum knowledge about the underlying game and the other learning agents. The proposed algorithms are the constant learning rate-based exponential moving average Q-learning (CLR-EMAQL) algorithm, and the exponential moving average Q-learning (EMAQL) algorithm. We mathematically show that the proposed CLR-EMAQL algorithm converges to Nash equilibrium in games with pure Nash equilibrium. We introduce the concept of Win-or-Learn-Slow (WoLS) mechanism for the proposed EMAQL algorithm so that the proposed algorithm learns fast when it is winning, and learns cautiously when it is losing. We also provide a theoretical proof of convergence to Nash equilibrium for the proposed EMAQL algorithm in games with pure Nash equilibrium. In games with mixed Nash equilibrium, our mathematical analysis shows that the proposed EMAQL algorithm converges to an equilibrium. Although our mathematical analysis does not explicitly show that the proposed EMAQL algorithm converges to Nash equilibrium, our simulation results indicate that the proposed EMAQL algorithm does converge to Nash equilibrium. Our simulation iii results also show the convergence of the proposed algorithms to Nash equilibrium over a variety of matrix and stochastic games that some of the state-of-the-art multi-agent reinforcement learning algorithms fail to converge to Nash equilibrium at.

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.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.815

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGuidance and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207