skip to main content
research-article

On the use of memory and resources in minority games

Authors Info & Claims
Published:21 May 2009Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The use of resources in multiagent learning systems is a relevant research problem, with a number of applications in resource allocation, communication and synchronization. Multiagent distributed resource allocation requires that agents act on limited, localized information with minimum communication overhead in order to optimize the distribution of available resources. When requirements and constraints are dynamic, learning agents may be needed to allow for adaptation. One way of accomplishing learning is to observe past outcomes, using such information to improve future decisions. When limits in agents' memory or observation capabilities are assumed, one must decide on how large should the observation window be. We investigate how this decision influences both agents' and system's performance in the context of a special class of distributed resource allocation problems, namely dispersion games. We show by using several numerical experiments over a specific dispersion game (the Minority Game) that in such scenario an agent's performance is non-monotonically correlated with her memory size when all other agents are kept unchanged. We then provide an information-theoretic explanation for the observed behaviors, showing that a downward causation effect takes place.

References

  1. Andrecut, M. and Ali, M. 2001. Q learning in the minority game. Phys. Rev. E 64, 67--103.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Araújo, R. M. and Lamb, L. C. 2004. Towards understanding the role of learning models in the dynamics of the minority game. In Proceedings of 16th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI'04). 727--731. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Araújo, R. M. and Lamb, L. C. 2007. A information-theoretic analysis of memory bounds in a distributed resource allocation mechanism. In Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI'07). AAAI Press, 212--217. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Arthur, W. B. 1994. Inductive reasoning and bounded rationality. Am. Econ. Rev. 84, 406--411.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Bazzan, A., Bordini, R., Vicari, R. M., and Wahle, J. 2000. Wayward agents in a commuting scenario (personalities in the minority game). In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems. IEEE, 55--62. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Bonabeau, E. 1999. Editor's introduction: Stigmergy. Artif. Life 5, 2, 95--96. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Bonabeau, E., Dorigo, M., and Theraulaz, G. 1999. Swarm Intelligence: From Natural to Artificial Systems. Oxford University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Carbonell, J. 1990. Machine Learning: Paradigms and Methods. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Cavagna, A. 1999. Irrelevance of memory in the minority game. Phys. Rev. E 59, 3783--3786.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Challet, D., Chessa, A., Marsili, M., and Zhang, Y.-C. 2001. From minority games to real markets. Quantit. Finan. 1, 168--176.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Challet, D., Marsili, M., and Zhang, Y.-C. 2004. Minority Games. Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Challet, D. and Zhang, Y.-C. 1997. Emergence of cooperation and organization in an evolutionary game. Physica A 246. 407--418.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Challet, D. and Zhang, Y.-C. 1998. On the minority game: Analytical and numerical studies. Physica A 256, 514--532.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Chen, Y. and Gazzale, R. S. 2004. When does learning in games generate convergence to Nash equilibria? the role of supermodularity in an experimental setting. Am. Econo. Rev. 94, 5, 1505--1535.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Chow, F. and Chau, H. 2003. Multiple choice minority game. Physica A 319, 601--615.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Crandall, J. W. and Goodrich, M. A. 2005. Learning to compete, compromise, and cooperate in repeated general-sum games. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML'05). ACM Press, 161--168. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. de Cara, A. R., Pla, O., and Guinea, F. 1999. Competition, efficiency and collective behavior in the “El Farol” bar model. Eur. Phys. J. B 10, 187--191.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Dietterich, T. G. 2003. Machine learning. In Nature Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. Macmillan, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Edmonds, B. and Moss, S. 1997. Modelling bounded rationality using evolutionary techniques. Proceedings of the AISB'97 Workshop on Evolutionary Computation, 31--42. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Farmer, J. D. 1999. Physicists attempt to scale the ivory towers of finance. Computing in Science and Engineering 1, 6, 26--39. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Fogel, D. 2000. Evolutionary Computation: Toward a New Philosophy of Machine Intelligence, 2nd ed. IEEE Press, New York. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Geisendorf, S. 2000. Modeling bounded rationality by genetic algorithms. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference of Agricultural Economists (IAAE). 31--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Gelenbe, E., Xu, Z., and Seref, E. 1999. Cognitive packet networks. In Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Grenager, T., Powers, R., and Shoham, Y. 2002. Dispersion games: general definitions and some specific learning results. In Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'02). AAAI Press, 398--403. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Hu, J. and Wellman, M. P. 1998. Online learning about other agents in a dynamic multiagent system. In Proceedings of Agents-98. ACM, 239--246. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Kahneman, D. 2003. Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. The Am. Econo. Rev. 93, 5, 1449--1475.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Li, Y., Riolo, R., and Savit, R. 2000. Evolution in minority games II: Games with variable strategy spaces. Physica A 276. 265--283.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Li, Y., VanDeemen, A., and Savit, R. 2000. The minority game with variable payoffs. Physica A 284, 501--503.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. MacKay, D. J. 2003. Information Theory, Inference & Learning Algorithms. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Manuca, R., Li, Y., Riolo, R., and Savit, R. 2000. The structure of adaptive competition in minority games. Physica A 282. 559--608.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Michalski, R. S., Carbonell, J. G., and Mitchell, T. M. 1983. Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach. Morgan Kaufmann, Palo Alto. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Mitchell, T. 1997. Machine Learning. McGraw-Hill. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Moelbert, S. and Rios, P. D. L. 2002. The local minority game. Physica A 303, 217--225.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Moro, E. 2004. The minority game: an introductory guide. In Advances in Condensed Matter and Statistical Physics, E. Korutcheva and R. Cuerno, Eds. Nova Science Publishers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Powers, R. and Shoham, Y. 2005. Learning against opponents with bounded memory. In Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI'05). 817--822. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Rubinstein, A. 1998. Modeling Bounded Rationality. Zeuthen Lecture Book Series. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussets.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Savit, R., Manuca, R., and Riolo, R. 1999. Adaptive competition, market efficiency, phase transitions and spin-glasses. Physical Review Letters 82, 2203--2206.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Shoham, Y., Powers, R., and Grenager, T. 2004. On the agenda(s) of research on multi-agent learning. In Proceedings of AAAI Fall Symposium on Artificial Multi-Agent Learning. Technical Report FS-04-02.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Simon, H. 1955. A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quart. J. Econ. 69.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Sysi-Aho, M., Chakraborti, A., and Kasti, K. 2003. Intelligent minority game with genetic-crossover strategies. Eur. Phys. J. B 34, 00234, 373--377.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Theraulaz, G. and Bonabeau, E. 1999. A brief history of stigmergy. Artif. Life 5, 2, 97--116. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Vidal, J. M. and Durfee, E. H. 1997. Agents learning about agents: A framework and analysis. In Proceedings of the 14th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'97), Multiagent Learning Workshop.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Wang, T. and Liu, J. 2005a. Evaluating the Minority Game strategy in agent role assignments. In Proceedings of the 4th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'05). 1347-1348. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Wang, T. and Liu, J. 2005b. The Minority Game Strategy in Team Competition: How and When? In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology. 587--594. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. On the use of memory and resources in minority games

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems
        ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems  Volume 4, Issue 2
        May 2009
        155 pages
        ISSN:1556-4665
        EISSN:1556-4703
        DOI:10.1145/1516533
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2009 ACM

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 21 May 2009
        • Accepted: 1 February 2009
        • Revised: 1 May 2008
        • Received: 1 November 2007
        Published in taas Volume 4, Issue 2

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader
      About Cookies On This Site

      We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

      Learn more

      Got it!