FedFormer: Contextual Federation with Attention in Reinforcement Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A core issue in multi-agent federated reinforcement learning is defining how to aggregate insights from multiple agents. This is commonly done by taking the average of each participating agent's model weights into one common model (FedAvg). We instead propose FedFormer, a novel federation strategy that utilizes Transformer Attention to contextually aggregate embeddings from models originating from different learner agents. In so doing, we attentively weigh the contributions of other agents with respect to the current agent's environment and learned relationships, thus providing a more effective and efficient federation. We evaluate our methods on the Meta-World environment and find that our approach yields significant improvements over FedAvg and non-federated Soft Actor-Critic single-agent methods. Our results compared to Soft Actor-Critic show that FedFormer achieves higher episodic return while still abiding by the privacy constraints of federated learning. Finally, we also demonstrate improvements in effectiveness with increased agent pools across all methods in certain tasks. This is contrasted by FedAvg, which fails to make noticeable improvements when scaled.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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 teacher head, 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".