Multi-Agent Imitation Learning: Value is Easy, Regret is Hard
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper provides formatting instructions for submissions to the NeurIPS 2024 conference.
- It covers key details like paper length, formatting requirements, submission deadlines, and other logistics.
- The instructions aim to ensure a consistent look and feel for all accepted papers at the conference.
Plain English Explanation
The paper you provided outlines the formatting guidelines that authors must follow when submitting papers to the NeurIPS 2024 conference. NeurIPS is a top artificial intelligence conference, and having standardized formatting helps the organizers review and publish the accepted papers more efficiently.
The instructions cover important details like the maximum length of the paper, how the text and figures should be formatted, and when the submission deadline is. Following these rules closely is crucial, as papers that don't meet the criteria may be rejected outright. The goal is to create a professional and cohesive look for all the published work at the conference.
Technical Explanation
The paper lays out the formatting specifications for submissions to the NeurIPS 2024 conference. It starts with an introduction that provides an overview of the key requirements.
The next section covers related work, discussing previous formatting guidelines for NeurIPS and other major AI conferences. This helps situate the current instructions within the broader context of the field.
The preliminaries section then dives into the specifics, detailing the allowed paper length, font sizes, margin widths, and other layout constraints. There are also guidelines for handling elements like figures, tables, and mathematical equations.
The final sections address submission logistics, including deadlines, file formats, and the review process. This information is crucial for authors to plan their work and ensure their papers are accepted.
Critical Analysis
The formatting instructions seem comprehensive and well-thought-out, covering all the key elements needed for a consistent conference proceedings. The guidelines strike a reasonable balance between providing clear rules and allowing authors some flexibility in their paper designs.
One potential limitation is the static nature of the instructions. As technology and publishing norms evolve, the formatting requirements may need to be updated over time. The organizers should consider incorporating mechanisms for periodic reviews and revisions to the guidelines.
Additionally, the instructions could be further improved by including more explanations for the rationale behind certain formatting choices. This would help authors understand the reasoning and potentially spark discussions around optimizing the guidelines.
Overall, these formatting instructions appear well-suited to ensure a high-quality and cohesive proceedings for the NeurIPS 2024 conference.
Conclusion
The paper you provided outlines the detailed formatting requirements for submissions to the NeurIPS 2024 conference. By following these guidelines, authors can ensure their papers adhere to the conference's standards and increase the chances of acceptance.
The instructions cover everything from page lengths and font sizes to figure formatting and submission deadlines. This level of standardization helps the organizers efficiently review and publish the accepted papers, creating a professional and consistent proceedings.
While the guidelines are comprehensive, there may be opportunities to further improve them by incorporating more flexibility and explaining the reasoning behind certain choices. Nonetheless, these formatting instructions are a crucial component in the successful execution of the NeurIPS 2024 conference.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Multi-Agent Imitation Learning: Value is Easy, Regret is Hard
Jingwu Tang, Gokul Swamy, Fei Fang, Zhiwei Steven Wu
We study a multi-agent imitation learning (MAIL) problem where we take the perspective of a learner attempting to coordinate a group of agents based on demonstrations of an expert doing so. Most prior work in MAIL essentially reduces the problem to matching the behavior of the expert within the support of the demonstrations. While doing so is sufficient to drive the value gap between the learner and the expert to zero under the assumption that agents are non-strategic, it does not guarantee robustness to deviations by strategic agents. Intuitively, this is because strategic deviations can depend on a counterfactual quantity: the coordinator's recommendations outside of the state distribution their recommendations induce. In response, we initiate the study of an alternative objective for MAIL in Markov Games we term the regret gap that explicitly accounts for potential deviations by agents in the group. We first perform an in-depth exploration of the relationship between the value and regret gaps. First, we show that while the value gap can be efficiently minimized via a direct extension of single-agent IL algorithms, even value equivalence can lead to an arbitrarily large regret gap. This implies that achieving regret equivalence is harder than achieving value equivalence in MAIL. We then provide a pair of efficient reductions to no-regret online convex optimization that are capable of minimizing the regret gap (a) under a coverage assumption on the expert (MALICE) or (b) with access to a queryable expert (BLADES).
Read more6/27/2024
0
Do LLM Agents Have Regret? A Case Study in Online Learning and Games
Chanwoo Park, Xiangyu Liu, Asuman Ozdaglar, Kaiqing Zhang
Large language models (LLMs) have been increasingly employed for (interactive) decision-making, via the development of LLM-based autonomous agents. Despite their emerging successes, the performance of LLM agents in decision-making has not been fully investigated through quantitative metrics, especially in the multi-agent setting when they interact with each other, a typical scenario in real-world LLM-agent applications. To better understand the limits of LLM agents in these interactive environments, we propose to study their interactions in benchmark decision-making settings in online learning and game theory, through the performance metric of emph{regret}. We first empirically study the {no-regret} behaviors of LLMs in canonical (non-stationary) online learning problems, as well as the emergence of equilibria when LLM agents interact through playing repeated games. We then provide some theoretical insights into the no-regret behaviors of LLM agents, under certain assumptions on the supervised pre-training and the rationality model of human decision-makers who generate the data. Notably, we also identify (simple) cases where advanced LLMs such as GPT-4 fail to be no-regret. To promote the no-regret behaviors, we propose a novel emph{unsupervised} training loss of emph{regret-loss}, which, in contrast to the supervised pre-training loss, does not require the labels of (optimal) actions. We then establish the statistical guarantee of generalization bound for regret-loss minimization, followed by the optimization guarantee that minimizing such a loss may automatically lead to known no-regret learning algorithms. Our further experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our regret-loss, especially in addressing the above ``regrettable'' cases.
Read more5/28/2024
0
No Regrets: Investigating and Improving Regret Approximations for Curriculum Discovery
Alexander Rutherford, Michael Beukman, Timon Willi, Bruno Lacerda, Nick Hawes, Jakob Foerster
What data or environments to use for training to improve downstream performance is a longstanding and very topical question in reinforcement learning. In particular, Unsupervised Environment Design (UED) methods have gained recent attention as their adaptive curricula enable agents to be robust to in- and out-of-distribution tasks. We ask to what extent these methods are themselves robust when applied to a novel setting, closely inspired by a real-world robotics problem. Surprisingly, we find that the state-of-the-art UED methods either do not improve upon the na{i}ve baseline of Domain Randomisation (DR), or require substantial hyperparameter tuning to do so. Our analysis shows that this is due to their underlying scoring functions failing to predict intuitive measures of ``learnability'', i.e., in finding the settings that the agent sometimes solves, but not always. Based on this, we instead directly train on levels with high learnability and find that this simple and intuitive approach outperforms UED methods and DR in several binary-outcome environments, including on our domain and the standard UED domain of Minigrid. We further introduce a new adversarial evaluation procedure for directly measuring robustness, closely mirroring the conditional value at risk (CVaR). We open-source all our code and present visualisations of final policies here: https://github.com/amacrutherford/sampling-for-learnability.
Read more8/30/2024
0
Provable Interactive Learning with Hindsight Instruction Feedback
Dipendra Misra, Aldo Pacchiano, Robert E. Schapire
We study interactive learning in a setting where the agent has to generate a response (e.g., an action or trajectory) given a context and an instruction. In contrast, to typical approaches that train the system using reward or expert supervision on response, we study learning with hindsight instruction where a teacher provides an instruction that is most suitable for the agent's generated response. This hindsight labeling of instruction is often easier to provide than providing expert supervision of the optimal response which may require expert knowledge or can be impractical to elicit. We initiate the theoretical analysis of interactive learning with hindsight labeling. We first provide a lower bound showing that in general, the regret of any algorithm must scale with the size of the agent's response space. We then study a specialized setting where the underlying instruction-response distribution can be decomposed as a low-rank matrix. We introduce an algorithm called LORIL for this setting and show that its regret scales as $sqrt{T}$ where $T$ is the number of rounds and depends on the intrinsic rank but does not depend on the size of the agent's response space. We provide experiments in two domains showing that LORIL outperforms baselines even when the low-rank assumption is violated.
Read more4/16/2024