MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401879294 · doi:10.1109/tnet.2024.3444593

Game-Theoretic Bandits for Network Optimization With High-Probability Swap-Regret Upper Bounds

2024· article· en· W4401879294 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsRegretSwap (finance)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationMathematical economicsUpper and lower boundsMathematicsEconomicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study a multi-agent bandit problem in an unknown general-sum game repeated for a number of rounds (i.e., learning in a black-box game with bandit feedback), where a set of agents have no information about the underlying game structure and cannot observe each other’s actions and rewards. In each round, each agent needs to play an arm (i.e., action) from a (possibly different) arm set (i.e., action set), and <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">only</i> receives the reward of the <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">played</i> arm that is affected by other agents’ actions. The objective of each agent is to minimize her own cumulative swap regret, where the swap regret is a generic performance measure for online learning algorithms. Many network optimization problems can be cast with the framework of this multi-agent bandit problem, such as wireless medium access control and end-to-end congestion control. We propose an online-mirror-descent-based algorithm and provide near-optimal high-probability swap-regret upper bounds based on refined martingale analyses, which can further bound the expected swap regret instead of the pseudo-regret studied in the literature. Moreover, the high-probability bounds guarantee that correlated equilibria can be achieved in a polynomial number of rounds if the algorithms are played by all agents. To assess the performance of the studied algorithm, we conducted numerical experiments in the context of wireless medium access control, and we performed emulation experiments by implementing the studied algorithms through the Linux Kernel for the end-to-end congestion control.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.291 · 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