Towards a Fast Detection of Opponents in Repeated Stochastic Games

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10642)

Abstract

Multi-agent algorithms aim to find the best response in strategic interactions. While many state-of-the-art algorithms assume repeated interaction with a fixed set of opponents (or even self-play), a learner in the real world is more likely to encounter the same strategic situation with changing counter-parties. This article presents a formal model of such sequential interactions, and a corresponding algorithm that combines the two established frameworks Pepper and Bayesian policy reuse. For each interaction, the algorithm faces a repeated stochastic game with an unknown (small) number of repetitions against a random opponent from a population, without observing the opponent’s identity. Our algorithm is composed of two main steps: first it draws inspiration from multiagent algorithms to obtain acting policies in stochastic games, and second it computes a belief over the possible opponents that is updated as the interaction occurs. This allows the agent to quickly select the appropriate policy against the opponent. Our results show fast detection of the opponent from its behavior, obtaining higher average rewards than the state-of-the-art baseline Pepper in repeated stochastic games.

Keywords

Stochastic games Reinforcement learning Multi-agent learning Policy reuse 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research has received funding through the ERA-Net Smart Grids Plus project Grid-Friends, with support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme.

References

  1. 1.
    Albrecht, S.V., Crandall, J.W., Ramamoorthy, S.: Belief and truth in hypothesised behaviours. Artif. Intell. 235, 63–94 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Auer, P., Cesa-Bianchi, N., Fischer, P.: Finite-time analysis of the multiarmed bandit problem. Mach. Learn. 47(2/3), 235–256 (2002)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Banerjee, B., Stone, P.: General game learning using knowledge transfer. In: International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 672–677 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barrett, S., Stone, P.: Cooperating with unknown teammates in complex domains: a robot soccer case study of ad hoc teamwork. In: Proceedings of the 29th Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 2010–2016. Austin, Texas, USA (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bednar, J., Chen, Y., Liu, T.X., Page, S.: Behavioral spillovers and cognitive load in multiple games: an experimental study. Games Econ. Behav. 74(1), 12–31 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bellman, R.: A Markovian decision process. J. Math. Mech. 6(5), 679–684 (1957)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bloembergen, D., Tuyls, K., Hennes, D., Kaisers, M.: Evolutionary dynamics of multi-agent learning: a survey. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 53, 659–697 (2015)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boutsioukis, G., Partalas, I., Vlahavas, I.: Transfer learning in multi-agent reinforcement learning domains. In: Sanner, S., Hutter, M. (eds.) EWRL 2011. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7188, pp. 249–260. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29946-9_25 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bowling, M., Veloso, M.: Multiagent learning using a variable learning rate. Artif. Intell. 136(2), 215–250 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brafman, R.I., Tennenholtz, M.: R-MAX a general polynomial time algorithm for near-optimal reinforcement learning. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 3, 213–231 (2003)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brunskill, E., Li, L.: PAC-inspired option discovery in lifelong reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1599–1610 (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Busoniu, L., Babuska, R., De Schutter, B.: A comprehensive survey of multiagent reinforcement learning. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C (Appl. Rev.) 38(2), 156–172 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chakraborty, D., Stone, P.: Multiagent learning in the presence of memory-bounded agents. Auton. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 28(2), 182–213 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Conitzer, V., Sandholm, T.: AWESOME: a general multiagent learning algorithm that converges in self-play and learns a best response against stationary opponents. Mach. Learn. 67(1–2), 23–43 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Crandall, J.W.: Just add pepper: extending learning algorithms for repeated matrix games to repeated markov games. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 399–406. Valencia, Spain (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Crandall, J.W.: Towards minimizing disappointment in repeated games. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 49(1), 111–142 (2014)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Crandall, J.W.: Robust learning for repeated stochastic games via meta-gaming. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 3416–3422. Buenos Aires, Argentina (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Da Silva, B.C., Basso, E.W., Bazzan, A.L., Engel, P.M.: Dealing with non-stationary environments using context detection. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learnig, pp. 217–224. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    De Hauwere, Y.M., Vrancx, P., Nowe, A.: Learning multi-agent state space representations. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 715–722. Toronto, Canada (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Elidrisi, M., Johnson, N., Gini, M., Crandall, J.W.: Fast adaptive learning in repeated stochastic games by game abstraction. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 1141–1148. Paris, France (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fernández, F., Veloso, M.: Probabilistic policy reuse in a reinforcement learning agent. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 720–727. ACM, Hakodata, Hokkaido, Japan (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fudenberg, D., Tirole, J.: Game Theory. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1991)MATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hernandez-Leal, P., Munoz de Cote, E., Sucar, L.E.: A framework for learning and planning against switching strategies in repeated games. Connect. Sci. 26(2), 103–122 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hernandez-Leal, P., Kaisers, M.: Learning against sequential opponents in repeated stochastic games. In: The 3rd Multi-disciplinary Conference on Reinforcement Learning and Decision Making, Ann Arbor (2017)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hernandez-Leal, P., Taylor, M.E., Rosman, B., Sucar, L.E., Munoz de Cote, E.: Identifying and tracking switching, non-stationary opponents: a bayesian approach. In: Multiagent Interaction without Prior Coordination Workshop at AAAI, Phoenix, AZ, USA (2016)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hernandez-Leal, P., Zhan, Y., Taylor, M.E., Sucar, L.E., Munoz de Cote, E.: Efficiently detecting switches against non-stationary opponents. Auton. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 31(4), 767–789 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Langford, J., Zhang, T.: The epoch-greedy algorithm for multi-armed bandits with side information. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 817–824 (2008)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lazaric, A., Ghavamzadeh, M.: Bayesian multi-task reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Machine Learning, Haifa, Israel (2010)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lazaric, A., Restelli, M., Bonarini, A.: Transfer of samples in batch reinforcement learning. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 544–551. ACM, Helsinki, Finland (2008)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rosman, B., Hawasly, M., Ramamoorthy, S.: Bayesian policy reuse. Mach. Learn. 104(1), 99–127 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Taylor, M.E., Stone, P., Liu, Y.: Transfer learning via inter-task mappings for temporal difference learning. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 8, 2125–2167 (2007)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Taylor, M.E., Stone, P.: Transfer learning for reinforcement learning domains: a survey. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 10, 1633–1685 (2009)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Watkins, J.: Learning from delayed rewards. Ph.D. thesis, King’s College, Cambridge, UK (1989)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Intelligent and Autonomous Systems GroupCentrum Wiskunde & InformaticaAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations