Combining Deep Reinforcement Learning and Search with Generative Models for Game-Theoretic Opponent Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The challenge in constructing artificial social agents is to enable adaptation ability to novel agents, and is called zero-shot coordination (ZSC). A promising approach is to train the adaptive agents by interacting with a diverse pool of collaborators, assuming that the greater the diversity in other agents seen during training, the better the generalisation. In this paper, we explore an alternative procedure by considering the behavioural predictability of collaborators, i.e. whether their actions and intentions are predictable, and use it to select a diverse set of agents for the training pool. More specifically, we develop a pool of agents through self-play training during which agents' behaviour evolves and has diversity in levels of behavioural predictability (LoBP) through its evolution. We construct an observer to compute the level of behavioural predictability for each version of the collaborators. To do so, the observer is equipped with the theory of mind (ToM) capability to learn to infer the actions and intentions of others. We then use an episodic memory based on the LoBP metric to maintain agents with different levels of behavioural predictability in the pool of agents. Since behaviours that emerge at the later training phase are more complex and meaningful, the memory is updated with the latest versions of training agents. Our extensive experiments demonstrate that LoBP-based diversity training leads to better ZSC than other diversity training methods.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".