Vojtěch Kovařík

Lewis Hammond, Alan Chan, Jesse Clifton et al. · stanford

The rapid development of advanced AI agents and the imminent deployment of many instances of these agents will give rise to multi-agent systems of unprecedented complexity. These systems pose novel and under-explored risks. In this report, we provide a structured taxonomy of these risks by identifying three key failure modes (miscoordination, conflict, and collusion) based on agents' incentives, as well as seven key risk factors (information asymmetries, network effects, selection pressures, destabilising dynamics, commitment problems, emergent agency, and multi-agent security) that can underpin them. We highlight several important instances of each risk, as well as promising directions to help mitigate them. By anchoring our analysis in a range of real-world examples and experimental evidence, we illustrate the distinct challenges posed by multi-agent systems and their implications for the safety, governance, and ethics of advanced AI.

David Milec, Vojtěch Kovařík, Viliam Lisý

We study the problem of adapting to a known sub-rational opponent during online play while remaining robust to rational opponents. We focus on large imperfect-information (zero-sum) games, which makes it impossible to inspect the whole game tree at once and necessitates the use of depth-limited search. However, all existing methods assume rational play beyond the depth-limit, which only allows them to adapt a very limited portion of the opponent's behaviour. We propose an algorithm Adapting Beyond Depth-limit (ABD) that uses a strategy-portfolio approach - which we refer to as matrix-valued states - for depth-limited search. This allows the algorithm to fully utilise all information about the opponent model, making it the first robust-adaptation method to be able to do so in large imperfect-information games. As an additional benefit, the use of matrix-valued states makes the algorithm simpler than traditional methods based on optimal value functions. Our experimental results in poker and battleship show that ABD yields more than a twofold increase in utility when facing opponents who make mistakes beyond the depth limit and also delivers significant improvements in utility and safety against randomly generated opponents.

Vojtěch Kovařík, David Milec, Michal Šustr et al.

Recent advancements in algorithms for sequential decision-making under imperfect information have shown remarkable success in large games such as limit- and no-limit poker. These algorithms traditionally formalize the games using the extensive-form game formalism, which, as we show, while theoretically sound, is memory-inefficient and computationally intensive in practice. To mitigate these challenges, a popular workaround involves using a specialized representation based on player specific information-state trees. However, as we show, this alternative significantly narrows the set of games that can be represented efficiently. In this study, we identify the set of large games on which modern algorithms have been benchmarked as being naturally represented by Sequential Bayesian Games. We elucidate the critical differences between extensive-form game and sequential Bayesian game representations, both theoretically and empirically. We further argue that the impressive experimental results often cited in the literature may be skewed, as they frequently stem from testing these algorithms only on this restricted class of games. By understanding these nuances, we aim to guide future research in developing more universally applicable and efficient algorithms for sequential decision-making under imperfect information.

Vojtěch Kovařík, Ryan Carey

For some problems, humans may not be able to accurately judge the goodness of AI-proposed solutions. Irving et al. (2018) propose that in such cases, we may use a debate between two AI systems to amplify the problem-solving capabilities of a human judge. We introduce a mathematical framework that can model debates of this type and propose that the quality of debate designs should be measured by the accuracy of the most persuasive answer. We describe a simple instance of the debate framework called feature debate and analyze the degree to which such debates track the truth. We argue that despite being very simple, feature debates nonetheless capture many aspects of practical debates such as the incentives to confuse the judge or stall to prevent losing. We then outline how these models should be generalized to analyze a wider range of debate phenomena.

Vojtěch Kovařík, Martin Schmid, Neil Burch et al.

Multiagent decision-making in partially observable environments is usually modelled as either an extensive-form game (EFG) in game theory or a partially observable stochastic game (POSG) in multiagent reinforcement learning (MARL). One issue with the current situation is that while most practical problems can be modelled in both formalisms, the relationship of the two models is unclear, which hinders the transfer of ideas between the two communities. A second issue is that while EFGs have recently seen significant algorithmic progress, their classical formalization is unsuitable for efficient presentation of the underlying ideas, such as those around decomposition. To solve the first issue, we introduce factored-observation stochastic games (FOSGs), a minor modification of the POSG formalism which distinguishes between private and public observation and thereby greatly simplifies decomposition. To remedy the second issue, we show that FOSGs and POSGs are naturally connected to EFGs: by "unrolling" a FOSG into its tree form, we obtain an EFG. Conversely, any perfect-recall timeable EFG corresponds to some underlying FOSG in this manner. Moreover, this relationship justifies several minor modifications to the classical EFG formalization that recently appeared as an implicit response to the model's issues with decomposition. Finally, we illustrate the transfer of ideas between EFGs and MARL by presenting three key EFG techniques -- counterfactual regret minimization, sequence form, and decomposition -- in the FOSG framework.

Vojtěch Kovařík, Dominik Seitz, Viliam Lisý et al.

We provide a formal definition of depth-limited games together with an accessible and rigorous explanation of the underlying concepts, both of which were previously missing in imperfect-information games. The definition works for an arbitrary extensive-form game and is not tied to any specific game-solving algorithm. Moreover, this framework unifies and significantly extends three approaches to depth-limited solving that previously existed in extensive-form games and multiagent reinforcement learning but were not known to be compatible. A key ingredient of these depth-limited games are value functions. Focusing on two-player zero-sum imperfect-information games, we show how to obtain optimal value functions and prove that public information provides both necessary and sufficient context for computing them. We provide a domain-independent encoding of the domains that allows for approximating value functions even by simple feed-forward neural networks, which are then able to generalize to unseen parts of the game. We use the resulting value network to implement a depth-limited version of counterfactual regret minimization. In three distinct domains, we show that the algorithm's exploitability is roughly linearly dependent on the value network's quality and that it is not difficult to train a value network with which depth-limited CFR's performance is as good as that of CFR with access to the full game.