Papers › Configurable Mirror Descent: Towards a Unification of Decision Making

Configurable Mirror Descent: Towards a Unification of Decision Making

20 May 2024arXiv:2405.11746archive 2025-07-28

Pengdeng Li, Shuxin Li, Chang Yang, Xinrun Wang, Shuyue Hu, Xiao Huang, Hau Chan, Bo An

Decision-making problems, categorized as single-agent, e.g., Atari, cooperative multi-agent, e.g., Hanabi, competitive multi-agent, e.g., Hold'em poker, and mixed cooperative and competitive, e.g., football, are ubiquitous in the real world. Various methods are proposed to address the specific decision-making problems. Despite the successes in specific categories, these methods typically evolve independently and cannot generalize to other categories. Therefore, a fundamental question for decision-making is: \emph{Can we develop \textbf{a single algorithm} to tackle \textbf{ALL} categories of decision-making problems?} There are several main challenges to address this question: i) different decision-making categories involve different numbers of agents and different relationships between agents, ii) different categories have different solution concepts and evaluation measures, and iii) there lacks a comprehensive benchmark covering all the categories. This work presents a preliminary attempt to address the question with three main contributions. i) We propose the generalized mirror descent (GMD), a generalization of MD variants, which considers multiple historical policies and works with a broader class of Bregman divergences. ii) We propose the configurable mirror descent (CMD) where a meta-controller is introduced to dynamically adjust the hyper-parameters in GMD conditional on the evaluation measures. iii) We construct the \textsc{GameBench} with 15 academic-friendly games across different decision-making categories. Extensive experiments demonstrate that CMD achieves empirically competitive or better outcomes compared to baselines while providing the capability of exploring diverse dimensions of decision making.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

4 samples harvested; 3 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 4 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from IpadLi/CMD. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections