Unsynchronized Decentralized Q-Learning: Two Timescale Analysis by Persistence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Nonstationarity is a fundamental challenge in multiagent reinforcement learning (MARL), where agents update their behavior as they learn. Many theoretical advances in MARL avoid the challenge of nonstationarity by coordinating the policy updates of agents in various ways, including synchronizing times at which agents are allowed to revise their policies. Synchronization enables analysis of many MARL algorithms via multitimescale methods, but such synchronization is infeasible in many decentralized applications. In this paper, we study an unsynchronized variant of the decentralized Q-learning algorithm, a recent MARL algorithm for stochastic games. We provide sufficient conditions under which the unsynchronized algorithm drives play to equilibrium with high probability. Our solution utilizes constant learning rates in the Q-factor update, which we show to be critical for relaxing the synchronization assumptions of earlier work. Our analysis also applies to unsynchronized generalizations of a number of other algorithms from the regret testing tradition, whose performance is analyzed by multitimescale methods that study Markov chains obtained via policy update dynamics. This work extends the applicability of the decentralized Q-learning algorithm and its relatives to settings in which parameters are selected in an independent manner, and tames nonstationarity without imposing the coordination assumptions of prior work.
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 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".