AI summary · arXiv: 2212.12567v2 · stat.ML

Adapting to game trees in zero-sum imperfect information games

Côme Fiegel, Pierre Ménard, Tadashi Kozuno, Rémi Munos, Vianney Perchet, Michal Valko

Original paper · DOI Submitted to arXiv on 23 Dec. 2022 License: CC BY 4.0

The essentials

  • Learning $\epsilon$-optimal strategies in zero-sum imperfect information games (IIGs) through self-play with trajectory feedback
  • Challenge of determining optimal strategies in IIGs due to partial observation of game state
  • Problem-independent lower bound on required number of realizations: $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(H(A_{\mathcal{X}}+B_{\mathcal{Y}})/\epsilon^2)$
  • Proposed Follow the Regularized Leader (FTRL) algorithms: Balanced FTRL and Adaptive FTRL
  • Balanced FTRL matches lower bound but requires prior knowledge of information set structure for regularization
  • Adaptive FTRL progressively adapts regularization without requiring prior knowledge, but needs $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(H^2(A_{\mathcal{X}}+B_{\mathcal{Y}})/\epsilon^2)$ realizations
  • Table summarizing sample complexity of different algorithms for episodic, finite, two-player, zero-sum IIGs in terms of $H$, $A_{\mathcal{X}}$, $B_{\mathcal{Y}}$, and $\epsilon$
  • Some algorithms mentioned in Table 1 do not require prior knowledge of information set structure
  • Contributes to understanding learning $\epsilon$-optimal strategies in zero-sum IIGs and provides algorithms with trade-offs in sample complexity and prior knowledge requirements.

Key points written by AI: they may contain errors, check them against the paper.

AI-generated keywords: Zero-sum Imperfect Information Games Follow the Regularized Leader Adaptive FTRL Balanced FTRL Sample Complexity

Read further

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
  • Original abstract
The paper titled "Adapting to game trees in zero-sum imperfect information games" discusses the problem of learning $\epsilon$-optimal strategies in zero-sum imperfect information games (IIGs) through self-play with trajectory feedback. In IIGs, each player only partially observes the current game state, which makes it challenging to determine the optimal strategies. The authors provide a problem-independent lower bound on the required number of realizations to learn these strategies with high probability. The lower bound is given as $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(H(A_{\mathcal{X}}+B_{\mathcal{Y}})/\epsilon^2)$, where $H$ represents the length of the game and $A_{\mathcal{X}}$ and $B_{\mathcal{Y}}$ are the total number of actions for the two players. To address this problem, the authors propose two Follow the Regularized Leader (FTRL) algorithms: Balanced FTRL and Adaptive FTRL. The Balanced FTRL algorithm matches the lower bound but requires prior knowledge of the information set structure to define regularization. On the other hand, Adaptive FTRL progressively adapts regularization to observations without requiring prior knowledge of the information set structure. However, Adaptive FTRL needs $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(H^2(A_{\mathcal{X}}+B_{\mathcal{Y}})/\epsilon^2)$ realizations. The paper also provides a table summarizing different algorithms' sample complexity for episodic, finite, two-player, zero-sum IIGs. The sample complexities are expressed in terms of $H$, $A_{\mathcal{X}}$, $B_{\mathcal{Y}}$, and $\epsilon$. It is worth noting that some algorithms mentioned in Table 1 do not require prior knowledge of the information set structure. Overall, this paper contributes to our understanding of learning $\epsilon$-optimal strategies in zero-sum IIGs and provides algorithms with different trade-offs in terms of sample complexity and prior knowledge requirements.

Was this synthesis useful?

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

Figures and plots

Ask about a figure by number or use its question button to request visual analysis. Up to two figures and four image panels per question. Values read from plots are approximate; check the original data.

AI assistant instructions?

Tools for this paper

Explain it differently 3 free rewrites left today
Save to a collection Group papers in collections to compare them, chat with them and export them. Create a free account Log in

Advanced tools Premium

For researchers who follow a field closely: citation alerts, journal-club slides, version comparison and Zotero export. Discover Premium

Zotero
Citation alerts
Journal club Premium+ Slides to present it
For journalists Premium+ Press kit and hype check

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.