Achieving convergence of multiple learning agents in general $N$-player games is imperative for the development of safe and reliable machine learning (ML) algorithms and their application to autonomous systems. Yet it is known that, outside the bounds of simple two-player games, convergence cannot be taken for granted. To make progress in resolving this problem, we study the dynamics of smooth Q-Learning, a popular reinforcement learning algorithm which quantifies the tendency for learning agents to explore their state space or exploit their payoffs. We show a sufficient condition on the rate of exploration such that the Q-Learning dynamics is guaranteed to converge to a unique equilibrium in any game. We connect this result to games for which Q-Learning is known to converge with arbitrary exploration rates, including weighted Potential games and weighted zero sum polymatrix games. Finally, we examine the performance of the Q-Learning dynamic as measured by the Time Averaged Social Welfare, and comparing this with the Social Welfare achieved by the equilibrium. We provide a sufficient condition whereby the Q-Learning dynamic will outperform the equilibrium even if the dynamics do not converge.
In this paper we present a first-order method that admits near-optimal convergence rates for convex/concave min-max problems while requiring a simple and intuitive analysis. Similarly to the seminal work of Nemirovski and the recent approach of Piliouras et al. in normal form games, our work is based on the fact that the update rule of the Proximal Point method (PP) can be approximated up to accuracy $\epsilon$ with only $O(\log 1/\epsilon)$ additional gradient-calls through the iterations of a contraction map. Then combining the analysis of (PP) method with an error-propagation analysis we establish that the resulting first order method, called Clairvoyant Extra Gradient, admits near-optimal time-average convergence for general domains and last-iterate convergence in the unconstrained case.
The designs of many large-scale systems today, from traffic routing environments to smart grids, rely on game-theoretic equilibrium concepts. However, as the size of an $N$-player game typically grows exponentially with $N$, standard game theoretic analysis becomes effectively infeasible beyond a low number of players. Recent approaches have gone around this limitation by instead considering Mean-Field games, an approximation of anonymous $N$-player games, where the number of players is infinite and the population's state distribution, instead of every individual player's state, is the object of interest. The practical computability of Mean-Field Nash equilibria, the most studied Mean-Field equilibrium to date, however, typically depends on beneficial non-generic structural properties such as monotonicity or contraction properties, which are required for known algorithms to converge. In this work, we provide an alternative route for studying Mean-Field games, by developing the concepts of Mean-Field correlated and coarse-correlated equilibria. We show that they can be efficiently learnt in \emph{all games}, without requiring any additional assumption on the structure of the game, using three classical algorithms. Furthermore, we establish correspondences between our notions and those already present in the literature, derive optimality bounds for the Mean-Field - $N$-player transition, and empirically demonstrate the convergence of these algorithms on simple games.
The study of learning in games has thus far focused primarily on normal form games. In contrast, our understanding of learning in extensive form games (EFGs) and particularly in EFGs with many agents lags far behind, despite them being closer in nature to many real world applications. We consider the natural class of Network Zero-Sum Extensive Form Games, which combines the global zero-sum property of agent payoffs, the efficient representation of graphical games as well the expressive power of EFGs. We examine the convergence properties of Optimistic Gradient Ascent (OGA) in these games. We prove that the time-average behavior of such online learning dynamics exhibits $O(1/T)$ rate convergence to the set of Nash Equilibria. Moreover, we show that the day-to-day behavior also converges to Nash with rate $O(c^{-t})$ for some game-dependent constant $c>0$.
In this paper we study two-player bilinear zero-sum games with constrained strategy spaces. An instance of natural occurrences of such constraints is when mixed strategies are used, which correspond to a probability simplex constraint. We propose and analyze the alternating mirror descent algorithm, in which each player takes turns to take action following the mirror descent algorithm for constrained optimization. We interpret alternating mirror descent as an alternating discretization of a skew-gradient flow in the dual space, and use tools from convex optimization and modified energy function to establish an $O(K^{-2/3})$ bound on its average regret after $K$ iterations. This quantitatively verifies the algorithm's better behavior than the simultaneous version of mirror descent algorithm, which is known to diverge and yields an $O(K^{-1/2})$ average regret bound. In the special case of an unconstrained setting, our results recover the behavior of alternating gradient descent algorithm for zero-sum games which was studied in (Bailey et al., COLT 2020).
Under what conditions do the behaviors of players, who play a game repeatedly, converge to a Nash equilibrium? If one assumes that the players' behavior is a discrete-time or continuous-time rule whereby the current mixed strategy profile is mapped to the next, this becomes a problem in the theory of dynamical systems. We apply this theory, and in particular the concepts of chain recurrence, attractors, and Conley index, to prove a general impossibility result: there exist games for which any dynamics is bound to have starting points that do not end up at a Nash equilibrium. We also prove a stronger result for $\epsilon$-approximate Nash equilibria: there are games such that no game dynamics can converge (in an appropriate sense) to $\epsilon$-Nash equilibria, and in fact the set of such games has positive measure. Further numerical results demonstrate that this holds for any $\epsilon$ between zero and $0.09$. Our results establish that, although the notions of Nash equilibria (and its computation-inspired approximations) are universally applicable in all games, they are also fundamentally incomplete as predictors of long term behavior, regardless of the choice of dynamics.
Mean Field Games (MFGs) have been introduced to efficiently approximate games with very large populations of strategic agents. Recently, the question of learning equilibria in MFGs has gained momentum, particularly using model-free reinforcement learning (RL) methods. One limiting factor to further scale up using RL is that existing algorithms to solve MFGs require the mixing of approximated quantities such as strategies or $q$-values. This is non-trivial in the case of non-linear function approximation that enjoy good generalization properties, e.g. neural networks. We propose two methods to address this shortcoming. The first one learns a mixed strategy from distillation of historical data into a neural network and is applied to the Fictitious Play algorithm. The second one is an online mixing method based on regularization that does not require memorizing historical data or previous estimates. It is used to extend Online Mirror Descent. We demonstrate numerically that these methods efficiently enable the use of Deep RL algorithms to solve various MFGs. In addition, we show that these methods outperform SotA baselines from the literature.
Games are natural models for multi-agent machine learning settings, such as generative adversarial networks (GANs). The desirable outcomes from algorithmic interactions in these games are encoded as game theoretic equilibrium concepts, e.g. Nash and coarse correlated equilibria. As directly computing an equilibrium is typically impractical, one often aims to design learning algorithms that iteratively converge to equilibria. A growing body of negative results casts doubt on this goal, from non-convergence to chaotic and even arbitrary behaviour. In this paper we add a strong negative result to this list: learning in games is Turing complete. Specifically, we prove Turing completeness of the replicator dynamic on matrix games, one of the simplest possible settings. Our results imply the undecicability of reachability problems for learning algorithms in games, a special case of which is determining equilibrium convergence.
The recent framework of performative prediction is aimed at capturing settings where predictions influence the target/outcome they want to predict. In this paper, we introduce a natural multi-agent version of this framework, where multiple decision makers try to predict the same outcome. We showcase that such competition can result in interesting phenomena by proving the possibility of phase transitions from stability to instability and eventually chaos. Specifically, we present settings of multi-agent performative prediction where under sufficient conditions their dynamics lead to global stability and optimality. In the opposite direction, when the agents are not sufficiently cautious in their learning/updates rates, we show that instability and in fact formal chaos is possible. We complement our theoretical predictions with simulations showcasing the predictive power of our results.