Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userEfficient Online Algorithmic Strategies for Several Two-Player Games with Different or Identical Player Roles
158
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Mugurel Ionut Andreica
Publication date
2013
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
In this paper we introduce novel algorithmic strategies for effciently playing two-player games in which the players have different or identical player roles. In the case of identical roles, the players compete for the same objective (that of winning the game). The case with different player roles assumes that one of the players asks questions in order to identify a secret pattern and the other one answers them. The purpose of the first player is to ask as few questions as possible (or that the questions and their number satisfy some previously known constraints) and the purpose of the secret player is to answer the questions in a way that will maximize the number of questions asked by the first player (or in a way which forces the first player to break the constraints of the game). We consider both previously known games (or extensions of theirs) and new types of games, introduced in this paper.
rate research
Read More
We study the computational complexity of the Buttons & Scissors game and obtain sharp thresholds with respect to several parameters. Specifically we show that the game is NP-complete for $C = 2$ colors but polytime solvable for $C = 1$. Similarly the game is NP-complete if every color is used by at most $F = 4$ buttons but polytime solvable for $F leq 3$. We also consider restrictions on the board size, cut directions, and cut sizes. Finally, we introduce several natural two-play
In recent years, constrained optimization has become increasingly relevant to the machine learning community, with applications including Neyman-Pearson classification, robust optimization, and fair machine learning. A natural approach to constrained optimization is to optimize the Lagrangian, but this is not guaranteed to work in the non-convex setting, and, if using a first-order method, cannot cope with non-differentiable constraints (e.g. constraints on rates or proportions). The Lagrangian can be interpreted as a two-player game played between a player who seeks to optimize over the model parameters, and a player who wishes to maximize over the Lagrange multipliers. We propose a non-zero-sum variant of the Lagrangian formulation that can cope with non-differentiable--even discontinuous--constraints, which we call the proxy-Lagrangian. The first player minimizes external regret in terms of easy-to-optimize proxy constraints, while the second player enforces the original constraints by minimizing swap regret. For this new formulation, as for the Lagrangian in the non-convex setting, the result is a stochastic classifier. For both the proxy-Lagrangian and Lagrangian formulations, however, we prove that this classifier, instead of having unbounded size, can be taken to be a distribution over no more than m+1 models (where m is the number of constraints). This is a significant improvement in practical terms.
Combinatorial Game Theory (CGT) is a branch of game theory that has developed almost independently from Economic Game Theory (EGT), and is concerned with deep mathematical properties of 2-player 0-sum games that are defined over various combinatorial structures. The aim of this work is to lay foundations to bridging the conceptual and technical gaps between CGT and EGT, here interpreted as so-called Extensive Form Games, so they can be treated within a unified framework. More specifically, we introduce a class of $n$-player, general-sum games, called Cumulative Games, that can be analyzed by both CGT and EGT tools. We show how two of the most fundamental definitions of CGT---the outcome function, and the disjunctive sum operator---naturally extend to the class of Cumulative Games. The outcome function allows for an efficient equilibrium computation under certain restrictions, and the disjunctive sum operator lets us define a partial order over games, according to the advantage that a certain player has. Finally, we show that any Extensive Form Game can be written as a Cumulative Game.
Designing an incentive compatible auction that maximizes expected revenue is a central problem in Auction Design. While theoretical approaches to the problem have hit some limits, a recent research direction initiated by Duetting et al. (2019) consists in building neural network architectures to find optimal auctions. We propose two conceptual deviations from their approach which result in enhanced performance. First, we use recent results in theoretical auction design (Rubinstein and Weinberg, 2018) to introduce a time-independent Lagrangian. This not only circumvents the need for an expensive hyper-parameter search (as in prior work), but also provides a principled metric to compare the performance of two auctions (absent from prior work). Second, the optimization procedure in previous work uses an inner maximization loop to compute optimal misreports. We amortize this process through the introduction of an additional neural network. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach by learning competitive or strictly improved auctions compared to prior work. Both results together further imply a novel formulation of Auction Design as a two-player game with stationary utility functions.
Zero-sum games have long guided artificial intelligence research, since they possess both a rich strategy space of best-responses and a clear evaluation metric. Whats more, competition is a vital mechanism in many real-world multi-agent systems capable of generating intelligent innovations: Darwinian evolution, the market economy and the AlphaZero algorithm, to name a few. In two-player zero-sum games, the challenge is usually viewed as finding Nash equilibrium strategies, safeguarding against exploitation regardless of the opponent. While this captures the intricacies of chess or Go, it avoids the notion of cooperation with co-players, a hallmark of the major transitions leading from unicellular organisms to human civilization. Beyond two players, alliance formation often confers an advantage; however this requires trust, namely the promise of mutual cooperation in the face of incentives to defect. Successful play therefore requires adaptation to co-players rather than the pursuit of non-exploitability. Here we argue that a systematic study of many-player zero-sum games is a crucial element of artificial intelligence research. Using symmetric zero-sum matrix games, we demonstrate formally that alliance formation may be seen as a social dilemma, and empirically that naive multi-agent reinforcement learning therefore fails to form alliances. We introduce a toy model of economic competition, and show how reinforcement learning may be augmented with a peer-to-peer contract mechanism to discover and enforce alliances. Finally, we generalize our agent model to incorporate temporally-extended contracts, presenting opportunities for further work.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
