Satisficing Paths and Independent Multiagent Reinforcement Learning in Stochastic Games
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. In multiagent reinforcement learning, independent learners are those that do not observe the actions of other agents in the system. Due to the decentralization of information, it is challenging to design independent learners that drive play to equilibrium. This paper investigates the feasibility of using satisficing dynamics to guide independent learners to approximate equilibrium in stochastic games. For [Formula: see text], an [Formula: see text]-satisficing policy update rule is any rule that instructs the agent to not change its policy when it is [Formula: see text]-best-responding to the policies of the remaining players; [Formula: see text]-satisficing paths are defined to be sequences of joint policies obtained when each agent uses some [Formula: see text]-satisficing policy update rule to select its next policy. We establish structural results on the existence of [Formula: see text]-satisficing paths into [Formula: see text]-equilibrium in both symmetric [Formula: see text]-player games and general stochastic games with two players. We then present an independent learning algorithm for [Formula: see text]-player symmetric games and give high probability guarantees of convergence to [Formula: see text]-equilibrium under self-play. This guarantee is made using symmetry alone, leveraging the previously unexploited structure of [Formula: see text]-satisficing paths.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".