Share your thoughts, 1 month free Claude Pro on usSee more
WorkDL logo mark

Robust multi-agent coordination via evolutionary generation of auxiliary adversarial attackers

About

Cooperative multi-agent reinforcement learning (CMARL) has shown to be promising for many real-world applications. Previous works mainly focus on improving coordination ability via solving MARL-specific challenges (e.g., non-stationarity, credit assignment, scalability), but ignore the policy perturbation issue when testing in a different environment. This issue hasn't been considered in problem formulation or efficient algorithm design. To address this issue, we firstly model the problem as a limited policy adversary Dec-POMDP (LPA-Dec-POMDP), where some coordinators from a team might accidentally and unpredictably encounter a limited number of malicious action attacks, but the regular coordinators still strive for the intended goal. Then, we propose Robust Multi-Agent Coordination via Evolutionary Generation of Auxiliary Adversarial Attackers (ROMANCE), which enables the trained policy to encounter diversified and strong auxiliary adversarial attacks during training, thus achieving high robustness under various policy perturbations. Concretely, to avoid the ego-system overfitting to a specific attacker, we maintain a set of attackers, which is optimized to guarantee the attackers high attacking quality and behavior diversity. The goal of quality is to minimize the ego-system coordination effect, and a novel diversity regularizer based on sparse action is applied to diversify the behaviors among attackers. The ego-system is then paired with a population of attackers selected from the maintained attacker set, and alternately trained against the constantly evolving attackers. Extensive experiments on multiple scenarios from SMAC indicate our ROMANCE provides comparable or better robustness and generalization ability than other baselines.

Lei Yuan, Zi-Qian Zhang, Ke Xue, Hao Yin, Feng Chen, Cong Guan, Li-He Li, Chao Qian, Yang Yu• 2023

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Multi-Agent Reinforcement LearningSMAC (test)
Win Rate (2s3z)98.2
56
Multi-Agent Reinforcement LearningSMAC
Win Rate (3m)93.6
34
Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (Predator-Prey)MPE PP_9/3
Average Cumulative Reward721.4
16
Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (Predator-Prey)MPE PP_3/1
Average Cumulative Reward175
16
Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (Predator-Prey)MPE PP_6/2
Average Cumulative Reward648.6
16
Multi-Agent Reinforcement LearningSMAC 3m
Win Rate34.7
13
Multi-Agent Reinforcement LearningSMAC 1c3s5z v1
Natural Performance99.1
9
Multi-Agent Reinforcement LearningSMAC 8m v1
Natural Performance98.1
9
Multi-Agent Reinforcement LearningSMAC 3s_vs_3z
Dis-155.4
9
Multi-Agent Reinforcement LearningSMAC 1c3s5z
Success Rate (Dis-1)86.5
9
Showing 10 of 16 rows

Other info

Follow for update