Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rating the skill of synthetic agents in competitive multi-agent environments

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Knowledge and Information Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A very effective and promising approach to simulate real-life conditions in multi-agent virtual environments with intelligent agents is to introduce social parameters and dynamics. Introduction of social parameters in such settings reshapes the overall performance of the synthetic agents, so a new challenge of reconsidering the methods to assess agents’ evolution emerges. In a number of studies regarding such environments, the rating of the agents is being considered in terms of metrics (or measures or simple grading) designed for humans, such as Elo and Glicko. In this paper, we present a large-scale evaluation of existing rating methods and a proposal for a new rating approach named Relative Skill-Level Estimator (RSLE), which can be regarded as a base for developing rating systems for multi-agent systems. The presented comparative study highlights an inconsistency in rating synthetic agents in the context described by the widely used methods and demonstrates the efficiency of the new RSLE.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connect_Four.

  2. Here, we do not consider the L1 distance but we, instead, simply subtract the rankings.

  3. The application along with usage instructions, an implementation of the algorithms as well as the experimental dataset can be accessed online https://sites.google.com/site/kiourtchairi/projects/reskill.

  4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess.

References

  1. Al-Khateeb B, Kendall G (2011) Introducing a Round Robin tournament into evolutionary individual and social learning checkers. In: Developments in E-systems engineering, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, pp 294–299. https://doi.org/110.1109/DeSE.2011.10

  2. Attle S, Baker B (2007) Cooperative learning in a competitive environment: classroom applications. Int J Teach Learn High Educ 19(1):77–83

    Google Scholar 

  3. Basili V, Caldiera G, Rombach HD (1994) Goal question metric approach. In: Encyclopedia of software engineering, pp 528–532

  4. Busoniu L, Babuska R, De Schutter B (2008) A comprehensive survey of multiagent reinforcement learning. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part C Appl Rev 38(2):156–172. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMCC.2007.913919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Caballero A, Botia J, Gomez-Skarmeta A (2011) Using cognitive agents in social simulations. Eng Appl Artif Intell 24(7):1098–1109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2011.06.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Calvo R (1998) Valencia Spain: the cradle of European chess. In: Presentation to the CCI, Vienna, Austria

  7. Di Bitonto P, Laterza M, Rosell T, Rossano V (2010) An evaluation method for multi-agent systems. In: Agent and multi-agent systems: technologies and applications, pp 32-41. https://doi.org/110.1007/978-3-642-13480-7_5

  8. Edelkamp S, Kissmann P (2008) Symbolic classication of general two-player games. In: Technical report. Technische Universitat, Dortmund

  9. Elo AE (1978) The rating of chess players, past and present. Arco Publishing, New York

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ferber J (1999) Multi-agent systems: an introduction to distributed artificial intelligence. Addison-Wesley, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ferber J, Gutknecht O, Michel F (2004) From agents to organizations: an organizational view of multi-agent systems. In: In Agent-oriented software engineering IV, LNCS 2935. Springer, Berlin, pp 214–230. https://doi.org/110.1007/978-3-540-24620-6_15

  12. Francisca T, Castro AM, Ana PR, Eugnio O (2013) Multi-agent learning in both cooperative and competitive environments. In: 16th Portuguese conference on artificial intelligence. Azores, Portugal, pp 400–411

  13. Friedrich H, Rogalla O, Dillmann R (1998) Integrating skills into multi-agent systems. J Intell Manuf 9(2):119–127. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008811827890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gilbert N, Troitzsch KG (2005) Simulation for the social scientist, 2nd edn. Open University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  15. Glickman EM (1995) A comprehensive guide to chess ratings. Am Chess J 3:59–102

    Google Scholar 

  16. Glickman EM (1999) Parameter estimation in large dynamic paired comparison experiments. Appl Stat 48:377–394

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Glickman EM, Albyn JC (1999) Rating the chess rating system. Chance 12(2):21–28

    Google Scholar 

  18. Harkness K (1967) Official chess handbook. McKay, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  19. Herbrich R, Minka T, Graepel T (2007) TrueSkill(TM): a Bayesian skill rating system. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 19:269–576

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hoen JP, Tuyls K, Panait L, Luke S, La Poutr JA (2005) An overview of cooperative and competitive multiagent learning. In: Proceedings of the first international conference on learning and adaption in multi-agent systems, Utrecht, The Netherlands, pp 1–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/11691839_1

  21. Kalles D (2007) Measuring expert impact on learning how to play a board game. In: IFIP conference on artificial intelligence applications and innovations, Athens, Greece

  22. Kalles D, Kanellopoulos P (2001) On verifying game design and playing strategies using reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of ACM symposium on applied computing, special track on artificial intelligence and computation logic. ACM, Las Vegas, pp 6–11

  23. Kapetanakis S, Kudenko D (2002) Reinforcement learning of coordination in cooperative multi-agent system. In: Proceeding of eighteenth national conference on artificial intelligence. Edmonton, Alberta, pp 326–331

  24. Kendall M (1936) A new measure of rank correlation. Biometrica 30(1/2):81–93

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Kiourt C, Kalles D (2012) Social reinforcement learning in game playing. In: IEEE international conference on tools with artificial intelligence, Athens, Greece, pp 322–326. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTAI.2012.51

  26. Kiourt C, Kalles D (2016) Synthetic learning agents in game-playing social environments. Adapt Behav 24(6):411–427. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059712316679239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kiourt C, Pavlidis G, Kalles D (2016a) Human rating methods on multi-agent systems. In: Multi-agent systems and agreement technologies: 13th European conference, EUMAS 2015, and third international conference, AT 2015, Athens, Greece. Springer, pp 129–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33509-4_11

  28. Kiourt C, Pavlidis G, Kalles D (2016b) ReSkill: relative skill-level calculation system. In: 9th hellenic conference on artificial intelligence (SETN2016), Thessaloniki, Greece, p 39. https://doi.org/10.1145/2903220.2903224

  29. Kiourt C, Kalles D and Kanellopoulos P (2017) How game complexity affects the playing behavior of synthetic agents. In: 15th European conference on multi-agent systems (EUMAS2017), France

  30. Kotb Y, Beauchemin S, Barron J (2012) Workflow nets for multiagent cooperation. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 9(1):198–203. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2011.2163510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Langville NA, Meyer DC (2012) Who’s #1?: The science of rating and ranking. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Liang, Shi W (2005) Performance evaluation of rating aggregation algorithms in reputation systems. In: International conference on collaborative computing: networking, applications and worksharing, p 10. https://doi.org/10.1109/COLCOM.2005.1651235

  33. Logan Y, Kagan T (2013) Elo ratings for structural credit assignment in multiagent systems. In: Twenty-seventh AAAI conference on artificial intelligence (late-breaking developments)

  34. March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ Sci 2(1):71–87

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Marivate VN, Marwala T (2008) Social learning methods in board game agents. In: IEEE symposium computational intelligence and games, Perth, Australia, pp 323–328. https://doi.org/10.1109/CIG.2008.5035657

  36. Nikolenko S, Sirotkin A (2011) A new bayesian rating system for team competitions. In: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on machine learning, Bellevue, Washington, pp 601–608

  37. Panait L, Luke S (2005) Cooperative multi-agent learning: the state of the art. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 11(3):387–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-005-2631-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Pieter JH, Tuyls K, Panait L, Luke S (2006) An overview of cooperative and competitive multiagent learning. In: Learning and adaption in multi-agent systems. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3898, pp 1–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/11691839_1

  39. Ruohomaa S, Kutvonen L, Koutrouli E (2007) Reputation management survey. In: ARES’07: the second international conference on availability, reliability and security, pp 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1109/ARES.2007.123

  40. Russell S, Norving P (2010) Artificial intelligence: a modern approach. Prentice-Hall Inc, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  41. Shoham Y, Leyton KB (2009) Multiagent systems: algorithmic, game-theoretic and logical foundations. Cambridge University Press, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Spearman C (1904) The proof and measurement of association between two things. Am J Psychol 15(1):72–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Sutton R (1988) Learning to predict by the methods of temporal differences. Mach Learn 3(1):9–44. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022633531479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sutton R, Barto A (1998) Reinforcement learning—an introduction. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Tampuu A, Matiisen T, Kodelja D, Kuzovkin I, Korjus K, Aru J, Vicente R (2017) Multiagent cooperation and competition with deep reinforcement learning. PLoS ONE 12(4):e0172395. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Tesauro G (1992) Practical issues in temporal difference learning. Mach Learn 4:257–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992697

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Tesauro G (1995) Temporal difference learning and TD-gammon. Commun ACM 38(3):56–68. https://doi.org/10.1145/203330.203343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Tesauro G (2002) Programming backgammon using self-teaching neural nets. Artif Intell 134:181–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(01)00110-2

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. Tromp J (2008) Solving connect-4 on medium board sizes. ICGA J 31(1):110–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Weng RC, Lin C (2011) A bayesian approximation method for online ranking. J Mach Learn Res 12:267–300

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Wilensky U (1999) NetLogo itself. In: Center for connected learning and computer-based modeling. Northwestern University, Evanston

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Science and Technology, Hellenic Open University, 26335, Patras, Greece

    Chairi Kiourt & Dimitris Kalles

  2. “Athena” Research Centre, University Campus at Kimmeria, 67100, Xanthi, Greece

    Chairi Kiourt & George Pavlidis

Authors
  1. Chairi Kiourt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dimitris Kalles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. George Pavlidis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chairi Kiourt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kiourt, C., Kalles, D. & Pavlidis, G. Rating the skill of synthetic agents in competitive multi-agent environments. Knowl Inf Syst 58, 35–58 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-018-1234-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-018-1234-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation