BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

David H. Wolpert

David H. Wolpert contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computer Science and Game TheoryArtificial IntelligenceMachine Learningcond-mat.stat-mechecon.GNmath.OCmath.PRmath.STMultiagent SystemsNeural and Evolutionary Computingphysics.data-anq-fin.ECQuantitative MethodsStatistics Theory

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
12works
0followers
14topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

12 published item(s)

preprint2024arXiv

Game Mining: How to Make Money from those about to Play a Game

It is known that a player in a noncooperative game can benefit by publicly restricting his possible moves before play begins. We show that, more generally, a player may benefit by publicly committing to pay an external party an amount that is contingent on the game's outcome. We explore what happens when external parties -- who we call ``game miners'' -- discover this fact and seek to profit from it by entering an outcome-contingent contract with the players. We analyze various structured bargaining games between miners and players for determining such an outcome-contingent contract. These bargaining games include playing the players against one another, as well as allowing the players to pay the miner(s) for exclusivity and first-mover advantage. We establish restrictions on the strategic settings in which a game miner can profit and bounds on the game miner's profit. We also find that game miners can lead to both efficient and inefficient equilibria.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Combining lower bounds on entropy production in complex systems with multiple interacting components

The past two decades have seen a revolution in statistical physics, generalizing it to apply to systems of arbitrary size, evolving while arbitrarily far from equilibrium. Many of these new results are based on analyzing the dynamics of the entropy of a system that is evolving according to a Markov process. These results comprise a sub-field called ``stochastic thermodynamics''. Some of the most powerful results in stochastic thermodynamics were traditionally concerned with single, monolithic systems, evolving by themselves, ignoring any internal structure of those systems. In this chapter I review how in complex systems, composed of many interacting constituent systems, it is possible to substantially strengthen many of these traditional results of stochastic thermodynamics. This is done by ``mixing and matching'' those traditional results, to each apply to only a subset of the interacting systems, thereby producing a more powerful result at the level of the aggregate, complex system.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

The Implications of the No-Free-Lunch Theorems for Meta-induction

The important recent book by G. Schurz appreciates that the no-free-lunch theorems (NFL) have major implications for the problem of (meta) induction. Here I review the NFL theorems, emphasizing that they do not only concern the case where there is a uniform prior -- they prove that there are "as many priors" (loosely speaking) for which any induction algorithm $A$ out-generalizes some induction algorithm $B$ as vice-versa. Importantly though, in addition to the NFL theorems, there are many {free lunch} theorems. In particular, the NFL theorems can only be used to compare the {marginal} expected performance of an induction algorithm $A$ with the marginal expected performance of an induction algorithm $B$. There is a rich set of free lunches which instead concern the statistical correlations among the generalization errors of induction algorithms. As I describe, the meta-induction algorithms that Schurz advocate as a "solution to Hume's problem" are just an example of such a free lunch based on correlations among the generalization errors of induction algorithms. I end by pointing out that the prior that Schurz advocates, which is uniform over bit frequencies rather than bit patterns, is contradicted by thousands of experiments in statistical physics and by the great success of the maximum entropy procedure in inductive inference.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

What is important about the No Free Lunch theorems?

The No Free Lunch theorems prove that under a uniform distribution over induction problems (search problems or learning problems), all induction algorithms perform equally. As I discuss in this chapter, the importance of the theorems arises by using them to analyze scenarios involving {non-uniform} distributions, and to compare different algorithms, without any assumption about the distribution over problems at all. In particular, the theorems prove that {anti}-cross-validation (choosing among a set of candidate algorithms based on which has {worst} out-of-sample behavior) performs as well as cross-validation, unless one makes an assumption -- which has never been formalized -- about how the distribution over induction problems, on the one hand, is related to the set of algorithms one is choosing among using (anti-)cross validation, on the other. In addition, they establish strong caveats concerning the significance of the many results in the literature which establish the strength of a particular algorithm without assuming a particular distribution. They also motivate a ``dictionary'' between supervised learning and improve blackbox optimization, which allows one to ``translate'' techniques from supervised learning into the domain of blackbox optimization, thereby strengthening blackbox optimization algorithms. In addition to these topics, I also briefly discuss their implications for philosophy of science.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Value of information in noncooperative games

In some games, additional information hurts a player, e.g., in games with first-mover advantage, the second-mover is hurt by seeing the first-mover's move. What properties of a game determine whether it has such negative "value of information" for a particular player? Can a game have negative value of information for all players? To answer such questions, we generalize the definition of marginal utility of a good to define the marginal utility of a parameter vector specifying a game. So rather than analyze the global structure of the relationship between a game's parameter vector and player behavior, as in previous work, we focus on the local structure of that relationship. This allows us to prove that generically, every game can have negative marginal value of information, unless one imposes a priori constraints on allowed changes to the game's parameter vector. We demonstrate these and related results numerically, and discuss their implications.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Predicting the behavior of interacting humans by fusing data from multiple sources

Multi-fidelity methods combine inexpensive low-fidelity simulations with costly but highfidelity simulations to produce an accurate model of a system of interest at minimal cost. They have proven useful in modeling physical systems and have been applied to engineering problems such as wing-design optimization. During human-in-the-loop experimentation, it has become increasingly common to use online platforms, like Mechanical Turk, to run low-fidelity experiments to gather human performance data in an efficient manner. One concern with these experiments is that the results obtained from the online environment generalize poorly to the actual domain of interest. To address this limitation, we extend traditional multi-fidelity approaches to allow us to combine fewer data points from high-fidelity human-in-the-loop experiments with plentiful but less accurate data from low-fidelity experiments to produce accurate models of how humans interact. We present both model-based and model-free methods, and summarize the predictive performance of each method under dierent conditions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Estimating Functions of Distributions Defined over Spaces of Unknown Size

We consider Bayesian estimation of information-theoretic quantities from data, using a Dirichlet prior. Acknowledging the uncertainty of the event space size $m$ and the Dirichlet prior's concentration parameter $c$, we treat both as random variables set by a hyperprior. We show that the associated hyperprior, $P(c, m)$, obeys a simple "Irrelevance of Unseen Variables" (IUV) desideratum iff $P(c, m) = P(c) P(m)$. Thus, requiring IUV greatly reduces the number of degrees of freedom of the hyperprior. Some information-theoretic quantities can be expressed multiple ways, in terms of different event spaces, e.g., mutual information. With all hyperpriors (implicitly) used in earlier work, different choices of this event space lead to different posterior expected values of these information-theoretic quantities. We show that there is no such dependence on the choice of event space for a hyperprior that obeys IUV. We also derive a result that allows us to exploit IUV to greatly simplify calculations, like the posterior expected mutual information or posterior expected multi-information. We also use computer experiments to favorably compare an IUV-based estimator of entropy to three alternative methods in common use. We end by discussing how seemingly innocuous changes to the formalization of an estimation problem can substantially affect the resultant estimates of posterior expectations.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning: How to Model Decision-Makers That Anticipate The Future

This paper introduces a novel framework for modeling interacting humans in a multi-stage game. This "iterated semi network-form game" framework has the following desirable characteristics: (1) Bounded rational players, (2) strategic players (i.e., players account for one another's reward functions when predicting one another's behavior), and (3) computational tractability even on real-world systems. We achieve these benefits by combining concepts from game theory and reinforcement learning. To be precise, we extend the bounded rational "level-K reasoning" model to apply to games over multiple stages. Our extension allows the decomposition of the overall modeling problem into a series of smaller ones, each of which can be solved by standard reinforcement learning algorithms. We call this hybrid approach "level-K reinforcement learning". We investigate these ideas in a cyber battle scenario over a smart power grid and discuss the relationship between the behavior predicted by our model and what one might expect of real human defenders and attackers.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Predicting the behavior of interacting humans by fusing data from multiple sources

Multi-fidelity methods combine inexpensive low-fidelity simulations with costly but high-fidelity simulations to produce an accurate model of a system of interest at minimal cost. They have proven useful in modeling physical systems and have been applied to engineering problems such as wing-design optimization. During human-in-the-loop experimentation, it has become increasingly common to use online platforms, like Mechanical Turk, to run low-fidelity experiments to gather human performance data in an efficient manner. One concern with these experiments is that the results obtained from the online environment generalize poorly to the actual domain of interest. To address this limitation, we extend traditional multi-fidelity approaches to allow us to combine fewer data points from high-fidelity human-in-the-loop experiments with plentiful but less accurate data from low-fidelity experiments to produce accurate models of how humans interact. We present both model-based and model-free methods, and summarize the predictive performance of each method under different conditions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Hysteresis effects of changing parameters of noncooperative games

We adapt the method used by Jaynes to derive the equilibria of statistical physics to instead derive equilibria of bounded rational game theory. We analyze the dependence of these equilibria on the parameters of the underlying game, focusing on hysteresis effects. In particular, we show that by gradually imposing individual-specific tax rates on the players of the game, and then gradually removing those taxes, the players move from a poor equilibrium to one that is better for all of them.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

What does Newcomb's paradox teach us?

In Newcomb's paradox you choose to receive either the contents of a particular closed box, or the contents of both that closed box and another one. Before you choose, a prediction algorithm deduces your choice, and fills the two boxes based on that deduction. Newcomb's paradox is that game theory appears to provide two conflicting recommendations for what choice you should make in this scenario. We analyze Newcomb's paradox using a recent extension of game theory in which the players set conditional probability distributions in a Bayes net. We show that the two game theory recommendations in Newcomb's scenario have different presumptions for what Bayes net relates your choice and the algorithm's prediction. We resolve the paradox by proving that these two Bayes nets are incompatible. We also show that the accuracy of the algorithm's prediction, the focus of much previous work, is irrelevant. In addition we show that Newcomb's scenario only provides a contradiction between game theory's expected utility and dominance principles if one is sloppy in specifying the underlying Bayes net. We also show that Newcomb's paradox is time-reversal invariant; both the paradox and its resolution are unchanged if the algorithm makes its `prediction' after you make your choice rather than before.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2007arXiv

Parametric Learning and Monte Carlo Optimization

This paper uncovers and explores the close relationship between Monte Carlo Optimization of a parametrized integral (MCO), Parametric machine-Learning (PL), and `blackbox' or `oracle'-based optimization (BO). We make four contributions. First, we prove that MCO is mathematically identical to a broad class of PL problems. This identity potentially provides a new application domain for all broadly applicable PL techniques: MCO. Second, we introduce immediate sampling, a new version of the Probability Collectives (PC) algorithm for blackbox optimization. Immediate sampling transforms the original BO problem into an MCO problem. Accordingly, by combining these first two contributions, we can apply all PL techniques to BO. In our third contribution we validate this way of improving BO by demonstrating that cross-validation and bagging improve immediate sampling. Finally, conventional MC and MCO procedures ignore the relationship between the sample point locations and the associated values of the integrand; only the values of the integrand at those locations are considered. We demonstrate that one can exploit the sample location information using PL techniques, for example by forming a fit of the sample locations to the associated values of the integrand. This provides an additional way to apply PL techniques to improve MCO.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access