The field of stochastic games has been actively pursued over the last seven decades because of several of its important applications in oligopolistic economics. In the past, zerosum stochastic games have been modelled and solved for Nash equilibria using the standard techniques of Markov decision processes. General-sum stochastic games on the contrary have posed difficulty as they cannot be reduced to Markov decision processes. Over the past few decades the quest for algorithms to compute Nash equilibria in general-sum stochastic games has intensified and several important algorithms such as stochastic tracing procedure [Herings and Peeters, 2004], NashQ [Hu and Wellman, 2003], FFQ [Littman, 2001], etc., and their generalised representations such as the optimization problem formulations for various reward structures [Filar and Vrieze, 2004] have been proposed. However, they suffer from either lack of generality or are intractable for even medium sized problems or both. In this paper, we propose three algorithms, OFF-SGSP, ON-SGSP and DON-SGSP, respectively, which we show provide Nash equilibrium strategies for general-sum discounted stochastic games. Here OFF-SGSP is an off-line algorithm while ON-SGSP and DON-SGSP are online algorithms. In particular, we believe that DON-SGSP is the first decentralized on-line algorithm. We show that both our on-line algorithms are computationally efficient.
A popular algorithm with guaranteed convergence to Nash equilibria in general-sum stochastic games is rational learning, proposed by @cite_20 . In their algorithm, each agent @math maintains a prior on what he believes to be other agents' strategy and updates it in a Bayesian manner. Combining this with certain assumptions of absolute continuity and grain of truth, the algorithm there is shown to converge to NE. ON-SGSP operates in a similar setting as that in , except that we do not assume the knowledge of reward functions. ON-SGSP is a model-free online algorithm and unlike , any agent's strategy in ON-SGSP does not depend upon Bayesian estimates of other agents' strategies and hence, their absolute continuity grain of truth assumptions do not apply.
@cite_20
2120846115 2944311505 1967250398 361876
We extend Q-learning to a noncooperative multiagent context, using the framework of general-sum stochastic games. A learning agent maintains Q-functions over joint actions, and performs updates based on assuming Nash equilibrium behavior over the current Q-values. This learning protocol provably converges given certain restrictions on the stage games (defined by Q-values) that arise during learning. Experiments with a pair of two-player grid games suggest that such restrictions on the game structure are not necessarily required. Stage games encountered during learning in both grid environments violate the conditions. However, learning consistently converges in the first grid game, which has a unique equilibrium Q-function, but sometimes fails to converge in the second, which has three different equilibrium Q-functions. In a comparison of offline learning performance in both games, we find agents are more likely to reach a joint optimal path with Nash Q-learning than with a single-agent Q-learning method. When at least one agent adopts Nash Q-learning, the performance of both agents is better than using single-agent Q-learning. We have also implemented an online version of Nash Q-learning that balances exploration with exploitation, yielding improved performance. We show for the first time, to our knowledge, that it is possible to reconcile in online learning in zero-sum games two seemingly contradictory objectives: vanishing time-average regret and non-vanishing step sizes. This phenomenon, that we coin fast and furious" learning in games, sets a new benchmark about what is possible both in max-min optimization as well as in multi-agent systems. Our analysis does not depend on introducing a carefully tailored dynamic. Instead we focus on the most well studied online dynamic, gradient descent. Similarly, we focus on the simplest textbook class of games, two-agent two-strategy zero-sum games, such as Matching Pennies. Even for this simplest of benchmarks the best known bound for total regret, prior to our work, was the trivial one of @math , which is immediately applicable even to a non-learning agent. Based on a tight understanding of the geometry of the non-equilibrating trajectories in the dual space we prove a regret bound of @math matching the well known optimal bound for adaptive step sizes in the online setting. This guarantee holds for all fixed step-sizes without having to know the time horizon in advance and adapt the fixed step-size accordingly. As a corollary, we establish that even with fixed learning rates the time-average of mixed strategies, utilities converge to their exact Nash equilibrium values. The single-agent multi-armed bandit problem can be solved by an agent that learns the values of each action using reinforcement learning. However, the multi-agent version of the problem, the iterated normal form game, presents a more complex challenge, since the rewards available to each agent depend on the strategies of the others. We consider the behavior of value-based learning agents in this situation, and show that such agents cannot generally play at a Nash equilibrium, although if smooth best responses are used, a Nash distribution can be reached. We introduce a particular value-based learning algorithm, which we call individual Q-learning, and use stochastic approximation to study the asymptotic behavior, showing that strategies will converge to Nash distribution almost surely in 2-player zero-sum games and 2-player partnership games. Player-dependent learning rates are then considered, and it is shown that this extension converges in some games for which many algorithms, including the basic algorithm initially considered, fail to converge. This paper investigates the problem of policy learning in multiagent environments using the stochastic game framework, which we briefly overview. We introduce two properties as desirable for a learning agent when in the presence of other learning agents, namely rationality and convergence. We examine existing reinforcement learning algorithms according to these two properties and notice that they fail to simultaneously meet both criteria. We then contribute a new learning algorithm, WoLF policy hillclimbing, that is based on a simple principle: “learn quickly while losing, slowly while winning.” The algorithm is proven to be rational and we present empirical results for a number of stochastic games showing the algorithm converges.