Paper detail

$α^α$-Rank: Practically Scaling $α$-Rank through Stochastic Optimisation

Recently, $α$-Rank, a graph-based algorithm, has been proposed as a solution to ranking joint policy profiles in large scale multi-agent systems. $α$-Rank claimed tractability through a polynomial time implementation with respect to the total number of pure strategy profiles. Here, we note that inputs to the algorithm were not clearly specified in the original presentation; as such, we deem complexity claims as not grounded, and conjecture solving $α$-Rank is NP-hard. The authors of $α$-Rank suggested that the input to $α$-Rank can be an exponentially-sized payoff matrix; a claim promised to be clarified in subsequent manuscripts. Even though $α$-Rank exhibits a polynomial-time solution with respect to such an input, we further reflect additional critical problems. We demonstrate that due to the need of constructing an exponentially large Markov chain, $α$-Rank is infeasible beyond a small finite number of agents. We ground these claims by adopting amount of dollars spent as a non-refutable evaluation metric. Realising such scalability issue, we present a stochastic implementation of $α$-Rank with a double oracle mechanism allowing for reductions in joint strategy spaces. Our method, $α^α$-Rank, does not need to save exponentially-large transition matrix, and can terminate early under required precision. Although theoretically our method exhibits similar worst-case complexity guarantees compared to $α$-Rank, it allows us, for the first time, to practically conduct large-scale multi-agent evaluations. On $10^4 \times 10^4$ random matrices, we achieve $1000x$ speed reduction. Furthermore, we also show successful results on large joint strategy profiles with a maximum size in the order of $\mathcal{O}(2^{25})$ ($\approx 33$ million joint strategies) -- a setting not evaluable using $α$-Rank with reasonable computational budget.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.