Investigating the Impact of Subgraph Social Structure Preference on the Strategic Behavior of Networked Mixed-Motive Learning Agents
Organizations: Xinqi Gao is with the Department of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906, USA · Mario Ventresca is with the Department of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906, USA
Abstract
Limited work has examined the strategic behaviors of relational networked learning agents under social dilemmas, and has overlooked the intricate social dynamics of complex systems. We address the challenge with Socio-Relational Intrinsic Motivation (SRIM), which endows agents with diverse preferences over sub-graphical social structures in order to study the impact of agents' personal preferences over their sub-graphical relations on their strategic decision-making under sequential social dilemmas. Our results in the Harvest and Cleanup environments demonstrate that preferences over different subgraph structures (degree-, clique-, and critical connection-based) lead to distinct variations in agents' reward gathering and strategic behavior: individual aggressiveness in Harvest and individual contribution effort in Cleanup. Moreover, agents with different subgraphical structural positions consistently exhibit similar strategic behavioral shifts. Our proposed BCI metric captures structural variation within the population, and the relative ordering of BCI across social preferences is consistent in Harvest and Cleanup games for the same topology, suggesting the subgraphical structural impact is robust across environments. These results provide a new lens for examining agents' behavior in social dilemmas and insight for designing effective multi-agent ecosystems composed of heterogeneous social agents.
Figures & tables
| Method | Reward | Mixed | Topology | Sub- | Agent |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shaping | Motive | Graph | |||
| Haeri [ 8 ] | ✓ | ✓ | 3 | ||
| Hughes et al. [ 4 ] | ✓ | ✓ | 5 | ||
| Jaques et al. [ 9 ] | ✓ | ✓ | 5 | ||
| Willis Luck [ 10 ] | ✓ | 2 | |||
| Roesch et al. [ 11 ] | ✓ | ✓ | 5 |
| Topology | a | LB-UB b | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bipartite | 0.525 | 0.520-0.529 | 0.501 | 0.500-0.504 | 0.500-0.667 |
| Complete | 0.234 | 0.234-0.234 | 0.234 | 0.234-0.234 | 0.234-0.234 |
| Cycle | 0.500 | 0.500-0.500 | 0.500 | 0.500-0.500 | 0.500-0.500 |
| House | 0.378 | 0.368-0.380 | 0.331 | 0.315-0.349 | 0.111-0.500 |
| Star | 0.023 | 0.022-0.032 | 0 | 0- | 0.000-0.750 |
| Symmetric | 0.228 | 0.226-0.230 | 0.220 | 0.219-0.224 | 0.219-0.316 |
| 1st Stage a : After Exploration Trials | 2nd Stage: Transient Stage | 3rd Stage: At Convergence | |||||||||||||
| Agent-id | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Wheel | 1.23 b | 2.73 | 2.57 | 3.56 | 2.30 | 46.40 | 29.85 | 22.74 | 21.14 | 28.75 | 16.56 | 5.26 | 7.76 | 2.79 | 13.45 |
| House | 3.58 | 1.99 | 2.13 | 3.57 | 5.73 | 40.13 | 77.83 | 37.93 | 39.11 | 75.06 | 5.18 | 20.07 | 19.70 | 6.45 | 17.52 |
| Bipartite | 1.37 | 0.87 | 8.48 | 3.01 | 3.55 | 220.81 | 120.42 | 49.12 | 28.74 | 47.68 | 6.21 | 8.35 | 4.99 | 3.65 | 4.84 |
| Symmetric | 0.57 | 0.61 | 4.31 | 3.89 | 2.62 | 114.04 | 211.06 | 36.39 | 31.70 | 54.69 | 19.47 | 9.37 | 9.89 | 3.93 | 8.55 |
| Star | 1.22 | 6.71 | 34.20 | 40.62 | 10.34 | 503.17 | 128.39 | 146.90 | 110.74 | 82.79 | 18.51 | 17.46 | 24.52 | 22.07 | 13.33 |
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Multi-Agent Systems
Multi-Agent Systems studies how autonomous agents coordinate, compete, communicate, and learn in shared or interdependent tasks.
See all 675 papers