Dual Ensembled Multiagent Q-Learning with Hypernet Regularizer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Overestimation in single-agent reinforcement learning has been extensively studied. In contrast, overestimation in the multiagent setting has received comparatively little attention although it increases with the number of agents and leads to severe learning instability. Previous works concentrate on reducing overestimation in the estimation process of target Q-value. They ignore the follow-up optimization process of online Q-network, thus making it hard to fully address the complex multiagent overestimation problem. To solve this challenge, in this study, we first establish an iterative estimation-optimization analysis framework for multiagent value-mixing Q-learning. Our analysis reveals that multiagent overestimation not only comes from the computation of target Q-value but also accumulates in the online Q-network's optimization. Motivated by it, we propose the Dual Ensembled Multiagent Q-Learning with Hypernet Regularizer algorithm to tackle multiagent overestimation from two aspects. First, we extend the random ensemble technique into the estimation of target individual and global Q-values to derive a lower update target. Second, we propose a novel hypernet regularizer on hypernetwork weights and biases to constrain the optimization of online global Q-network to prevent overestimation accumulation. Extensive experiments in MPE and SMAC show that the proposed method successfully addresses overestimation across various tasks.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".