Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 72 references

Prediction-Aware Learning in Multi-Agent Systems

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that in time-varying multiplayer games, learning rates can be governed by forecasting accuracy instead of by how fast the game changes: with the POMWU algorithm, bounded prediction errors yield the same regret…

desk verdict Solid RVU analysis and a genuinely new prediction-aware framework, but the equilibrium convergence claims don't survive contact with history-dependent deviations. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.19144 v2 pith:R3L75UQK submitted 2025-01-31 cs.GT

Aymeric Capitaine , Etienne Boursier , Eric Moulines , Michael I. Jordan , Alain Durmus This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.GT MSC 91A2691A2068T05
keywords prediction-awarelearningtime-varyinggamesoptimisticmultiplicativeweightscontextualregretcoarsecorrelatedequilibriumsocialwelfareonlinein
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes a prediction-aware model of time-varying multiplayer games: at each round every player receives a private forecast of an unobserved state of nature, chooses a mixed action, then observes the true state and the full-information payoff. Against this backdrop, it introduces POMWU, a contextual extension of optimistic multiplicative weights, and proves that the quality of the players' forecasts, measured by the number of mispredictions, controls how far individual regret, equilibrium approximation, and social welfare are from the static-game benchmarks. Under bounded prediction errors the rates match the guarantees known for constant games. The point of the exercise is that predictable variation in a game does not have to be paid for in regret; only the residual forecasting error matters.

What carries the argument

The central object is POMWU, which keeps one optimistic multiplicative weights instance per context $z \in \mathcal{Z}$; when a player predicts $\hat{Z}_t^j$, it plays from that instance's distribution and receives an optimistic hint from the stored matrix $\Psi_z$. The load-bearing proof device is a new contextual RVU (regret bounded by variation in utility) bound: instead of the classic global path-length term, the regret of each player is bounded by the sum of per-context path lengths of feedback and strategies plus the number $L_T^j$ of mispredictions. The argument also uses a contextual version of the Blum-Mansour reduction to convert external-regret guarantees into swap-regret guarantees, and the smoothness condition to turn sums of regrets into social-cost bounds.

What would settle it

Run POMWU with a perfect oracle predictor ($L_T = 0$) on a finite-context game for $T = 10^6$ with $\eta$ tuned as in Proposition 6; the theorem predicts per-agent contextual regret growing like $T^{1/4}$. If the empirical regret grows linearly, or if the $m=1$ static case fails to reproduce the known optimistic-MWU behavior, the contextual RVU bound is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that in a time-varying game, the quantity that should appear in regret bounds is not a measure of how much the game moved but a measure of how often players failed to predict the state of nature. Formally, if every agent uses POMWU with learning rate $\eta^\star$ and $L_T = \max_j L_T^j$ is the largest number of context mispredictions, the contextual external regret of every agent is $O([\ln(K)(L_T + m)]^{3/4} T^{1/4} J^{1/2})$ (Proposition 6). The empirical joint policy is then an $\epsilon$-approximate coarse correlated equilibrium with $\epsilon = O([\ln(K)(L_T + m)]^{3/4} J^{1/2} T^{-3/4})$ (Corollary 1), and under the smoothness condition the average social cost satisfies $\frac{1}{T}\sum_t C_t(w_t) \leq \gamma C^\star + O(J \ln(K) T^{-1}(L_T + mJ))$ (Corollary 3). When $L_T$ is constant, these recover the static-game rates of Syrgkanis et al. (2015). The same story holds for swap regret and correlated equilibrium, with an extra factor of $K$ from a contextual Blum-Mansour reduction.

Load-bearing premise

The context set $\mathcal{Z}$ must be finite and known in advance, because POMWU keeps a separate OMWU instance for each of the $m$ contexts and every bound contains $m$; the paper does not prove an infinite-context version.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • When all players use POMWU with bounded mispredictions, their empirical joint policy converges to a coarse correlated equilibrium at rate $T^{-3/4}$ up to logarithmic factors.
  • With the swap-regret variant, the same guarantees apply to the tighter correlated equilibrium concept, at the cost of an extra factor $K$.
  • Under the smoothness condition, average social cost approaches $\gamma$ times the optimal cost, with an error that shrinks like $T^{-1}$ when mispredictions are bounded.
  • Predictions from any multiclass learner with a finite Littlestone dimension give $L_T = O(1)$ in the realizable case, so the static-game guarantees transfer essentially unchanged.
  • POMWU remains a no-regret algorithm against arbitrary opponent sequences, with regret $O(\sqrt{\ln(K)(L_T^j + m)(L_T^j + T)})$, so robustness to adversarial play is preserved.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A consequence left implicit in the paper is that forecast quality is fungible: any online multiclass predictor with a mistake bound can be plugged into POMWU, so better forecasting algorithms directly improve equilibrium and welfare guarantees without changing the game-theoretic analysis.
  • The per-context tabular structure suggests the finite-context assumption is the real bottleneck; an infinite-context version would need function approximation or discretization, and the paper explicitly defers this, so testing on large or continuous context sets is a natural next step.
  • The paper states that extending to bandit feedback should be feasible but does not carry it out; if that extension holds, POMWU would apply to settings where players observe only realized costs rather than full payoff matrices.
  • Proposition 9 shows that shared predictions remove the condition $T = \Omega(J^2 L_T)$, hinting that collaborative forecasting is not only a practical convenience but can strengthen the theoretical guarantee; quantifying this trade-off is an open direction.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a prediction-aware framework for repeated general-sum games with an unobserved state of nature. Each agent receives a prediction of the current state, and payoffs are linear in the state. The proposed algorithm, POMWU, maintains one optimistic multiplicative-weights update per context and uses the predicted context in the optimistic step. The main theoretical results are a contextual RVU bound (Proposition 5); an individual contextual-regret bound of order O([ln K (L_T + m)]^{3/4} T^{1/4} J^{1/2}) under a condition T = Omega(J^2 L_T) (Proposition 6); convergence of the empirical policy to epsilon-contextual coarse correlated and correlated equilibria (Corollaries 1--2); a social-welfare bound under the contextual smoothness condition (Proposition 7 and Corollary 3); and robustness against arbitrary opponent sequences (Proposition 8). The paper also reports a traffic-routing experiment on the Sioux Falls network.

Significance. If the issues below are repaired, this is a useful contribution: it extends the static-game guarantees of Syrgkanis et al. (2015) to games whose payoffs vary in a predictable way, and the per-context RVU decomposition is nontrivial. The paper is honest about the finite-context assumption H2 and about the fact that infinite contexts require different techniques. The individual-regret and social-welfare parts appear sound, and the realizable-case reduction to known multiclass mistake bounds is a nice touch. However, the equilibrium part currently contains a proof step that is invalid for the stated equilibrium definition, and Corollary 2 states a rate with the wrong dependence on K. Both problems are local and fixable.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 2, Definition 1, and Proposition 2 (Appendix G)] The proof of Proposition 2 replaces the deviation term E_{pi^j(Z_t) \otimes \nu^{-j}(Z_t)}[\phi] by E_{pi^j(Z_t) \otimes w^{-j}_t}[\phi]. This equality is valid when pi^j is a context-only policy, but Definition 1 quantifies over the set Pi^j of history-dependent policies introduced in Section 2, where pi^j takes the history h_{t-1} as an argument. For history-dependent policies the two expressions differ, so the displayed chain of equalities in the proof is not justified. The proposition can be repaired: after the context-conditional decomposition, one should apply, for each s, the per-round inequality \langle Z, \Phi^j(w^{-j}_s)\pi^j_t(z)\rangle \ge \langle Z, \Phi^j(w^{-j}_s)\pi^j_\star(z)\rangle before averaging over s; this gives the same final bound. However, as written, the proof is invalid for the stated definition, and the notation pi^j(Z_t) for a history-dependent policy is ambiguous. Please rewrite the proof and, if the intended equilibrium concept is the context-only one, say so explicitly in Definition 1.
  2. [Corollary 2] The stated rate for the contextual correlated equilibrium does not follow from the preceding results. Proposition 1 gives \bar{R}^j_T \le K R^j_T, and Proposition 6 gives R^j_T = O([\ln K (L_T + m)]^{3/4} T^{1/4} J^{1/2}). Combining these with Proposition 3 yields \bar{\varepsilon} = O(K [\ln K (L_T + m)]^{3/4} T^{-3/4} J^{1/2}), not O([K \ln K (L_T + m)]^{3/4} T^{-3/4} J^{1/2}). The displayed bound is smaller by a factor K^{1/4}, and I see no argument in the paper that removes this factor. Please correct the statement and any downstream discussion of the correlated-equilibrium rate.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Appendix G, proof of Proposition 5, term (ii)] The displayed equality in the bound of term (ii) has an index error. Writing a_i = \|w_{z,i}-\tilde{\rho}_{z,i}\|_1^2 and b_i = \|w_{z,i}-g_{z,i}\|_1^2, the correct identity is \sum_{i=1}^{n_z}(a_i+b_i) = \sum_{i=1}^{n_z}(a_{i-1}+b_i) + (a_{n_z}-a_0). With w_{z,0}=\tilde{\rho}_{z,0}, the subsequent lower bound follows; the version printed in the paper is not correct as written.
  2. [Proposition 7 and Corollary 3] The choice \eta = (4(J-1))^{-1} is undefined for J=1. The paper should either state an assumption J \ge 2 or give a separate argument for the single-player case.
  3. [Notation for L_T] The symbol L_T is used with two different meanings: in Proposition 6 and Corollaries 1--2 it is the per-player maximum, while in Proposition 7 it is the sum over players. Please rename one of them (for example L_T^{\max} and L_T^{\rm sum}) to avoid confusion when the results are compared.
  4. [Typos and wording] The abstract writes 'POWMU' instead of 'POMWU'; Corollary 2 writes 'conjonction' for 'conjunction'; Corollary 3 contains 'If Assume all agents'; and the reference to Foster and Vohra contains an extraneous space. These should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the bounds are conditional on the externally supplied misprediction count L_T, and the only self-citations occur in non-load-bearing related-work discussion.

full rationale

The paper's central claims (Propositions 5-9, Corollaries 1-3) are derived from an explicit analysis of POMWU, a contextual OMWU variant. The key quantity L_T is the number of mispredictions made by an external prediction mechanism, not a parameter fitted to the paper's own conclusions; the realizable and agnostic bounds on L_T are quoted from Daniely et al. (2014), an independent external source with no author overlap. No equation assumes its target bound as an input: Proposition 5 establishes a contextual RVU inequality from the update's first-order conditions, Proposition 6 optimizes the resulting expression, and Propositions 7-8 use the same bound with different learning rates. The paper does not rename a known result: it explicitly distinguishes itself from Sessa et al. (2021) by requiring contexts to be predicted rather than revealed, and the comparisons to Syrgkanis et al. (2015) are used as a static baseline, not as a substitute for the derivation. Self-citations such as Boursier et al. (2022) appear only in the related-work overview and do not carry any load-bearing step. The skeptical mismatch between history-dependent deviation policies in Definitions 1-2 and the context-only comparator used in the proof of Proposition 2 is a potential correctness gap, but it is not a circularity: the proof assumes an inequality that does not follow from the regret definition; it does not define the conclusion into its input. The finite-context assumption H2 is acknowledged as a structural limitation and does not affect the circularity analysis. Overall the derivation chain is self-contained conditional on its stated assumptions H1-H3 and the externally supplied prediction error count.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard online-learning assumptions (H1, H2, full-information feedback), a smoothness assumption for welfare, and a bounded mistake count. The algorithm itself has no fitted constants beyond the learning rate. The main structural limitation is H2 (finite contexts), which the paper acknowledges.

free parameters (2)
  • learning rate eta = Prop 6: eta* = Theta(J^{-1/2} T^{-1/4} [ln(K)(L_T+m)]^{1/4}); Prop 7: eta = (4(J-1))^{-1}; experiments: not reported
    Chosen by the authors to balance the RVU bound; in experiments the value is not given, which affects reproducibility.
  • SGD learning rate for online logistic regression = not reported
    Used in the traffic experiment to train the context predictor; its absence makes the empirical section hard to reproduce exactly.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption H1: bounded payoffs, |<Z, phi^j(a)>| <= 1
    Ensures costs are bounded by 1 so KL-type arguments and norm bounds hold (Section 2, H1).
  • domain assumption H2: finite context set Z with m elements
    POMWU keeps one MWU instance per context; all bounds contain m. Infinite contexts are deferred (Section 2, H2; Appendix B).
  • domain assumption H3: (delta, mu)-smoothness for social welfare
    Used only for social welfare results to relate social cost to optimum via the price of anarchy (Section 2, H3).
  • domain assumption Full-information feedback: agents observe Phi^j(w^{-j}_t) and Z_t each round
    Players observe the full cost matrix for each pure action and the true state of nature; bandit feedback is left for future work (Section 2, model).
  • domain assumption Realizable predictions with finite Littlestone dimension
    The bounded-error regime relies on a hypothesis class with finite Littlestone dimension and a known mistake-bound algorithm (Remark 1 and Appendix D).
  • ad hoc to paper Technical condition T = Omega(J^2 L_T) in Proposition 6
    Imposed in Proposition 6 and Corollaries 1-2 to keep the cubic term in the learning rate negligible; without it the stated O(T^{1/4}) rate is not proven.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Prediction-Aware Learning in Multi-Agent Systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/R3L75UQK

@misc{pith2026250119144,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Prediction-Aware Learning in Multi-Agent Systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/R3L75UQK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.19144}
}
read the original abstract

The framework of uncoupled online learning in multiplayer games has made significant progress in recent years. In particular, the development of time-varying games has considerably expanded its modeling capabilities. However, current regret bounds quickly become vacuous when the game undergoes significant variations over time, even when these variations are easy to predict. Intuitively, the ability of players to forecast future payoffs should lead to tighter guarantees, yet existing approaches fail to incorporate this aspect. This work aims to fill this gap by introducing a novel prediction-aware framework for time-varying games, where agents can forecast future payoffs and adapt their strategies accordingly. In this framework, payoffs depend on an underlying state of nature that agents predict in an online manner. To leverage these predictions, we propose the POWMU algorithm, a contextual extension of the optimistic Multiplicative Weight Update algorithm, for which we establish theoretical guarantees on social welfare and convergence to equilibrium. Our results demonstrate that, under bounded prediction errors, the proposed framework achieves performance comparable to the static setting. Finally, we empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of POWMU in a traffic routing experiment.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.19144 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Average repartition of agents on the network for each context under a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Average regret over agents for POMWU and OMWU [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Near-optimal no-regret learning for correlated equilibria in multi-player general-sum games

    Ioannis Anagnostides, Constantinos Daskalakis, Gabriele Farina, Maxwell Fishelson, Noah Golowich, and Tuomas Sandholm. Near-optimal no-regret learning for correlated equilibria in multi-player general-sum games. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 736--749, 2022 a

    2022

  2. [2]

    Uncoupled learning dynamics with o (log t) swap regret in multiplayer games

    Ioannis Anagnostides, Gabriele Farina, Christian Kroer, Chung-Wei Lee, Haipeng Luo, and Tuomas Sandholm. Uncoupled learning dynamics with o (log t) swap regret in multiplayer games. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35: 0 3292--3304, 2022 b

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Optimistic Mirror Descent Either Converges to Nash or to Strong Coarse Correlated Equilibria in Bimatrix Games

    Ioannis Anagnostides, Gabriele Farina, Ioannis Panageas, and Tuomas Sandholm. Optimistic mirror descent either converges to nash or to strong coarse correlated equilibria in bimatrix games, 2022 c . URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.12074

    work page Pith review arXiv 2022

  4. [4]

    On the convergence of no-regret learning dynamics in time-varying games

    Ioannis Anagnostides, Ioannis Panageas, Gabriele Farina, and Tuomas Sandholm. On the convergence of no-regret learning dynamics in time-varying games. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    The nonstochastic multiarmed bandit problem

    Peter Auer, Nicolo Cesa-Bianchi, Yoav Freund, and Robert E Schapire. The nonstochastic multiarmed bandit problem. SIAM journal on computing, 32 0 (1): 0 48--77, 2002

    2002

  6. [6]

    Correlated equilibrium as an expression of bayesian rationality

    Robert J Aumann. Correlated equilibrium as an expression of bayesian rationality. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, pages 1--18, 1987

    work page 1987

  7. [7]

    A simple model of herd behavior

    Abhijit V Banerjee. A simple model of herd behavior. The quarterly journal of economics, 107 0 (3): 0 797--817, 1992

    work page 1992

  8. [8]

    Addressing misspecification in contextual optimization, 2024

    Omar Bennouna, Jiawei Zhang, Saurabh Amin, and Asuman Ozdaglar. Addressing misspecification in contextual optimization, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.10479

    arXiv 2024

Show all 72 references
  1. [9]

    Non-stationary stochastic optimization

    Omar Besbes, Yonatan Gur, and Assaf Zeevi. Non-stationary stochastic optimization. Operations research, 63 0 (5): 0 1227--1244, 2015

    2015

  2. [10]

    A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades

    Sushil Bikhchandani, David Hirshleifer, and Ivo Welch. A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. Journal of political Economy, 100 0 (5): 0 992--1026, 1992

    1992

  3. [11]

    From external to internal regret

    Avrim Blum and Yishay Mansour. From external to internal regret. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 8 0 (6), 2007

    2007

  4. [12]

    Collaborative pac learning

    Avrim Blum, Nika Haghtalab, Ariel D Procaccia, and Mingda Qiao. Collaborative pac learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  5. [13]

    Social learning in non-stationary environments

    Etienne Boursier, Vianney Perchet, and Marco Scarsini. Social learning in non-stationary environments. In Sanjoy Dasgupta and Nika Haghtalab, editors, Proceedings of The 33rd International Conference on Algorithmic Learning Theory, volume 167 of Proceedings of Machine Learning...

    2022

  6. [14]

    Rational herds: Economic models of social learning

    Christophe Chamley. Rational herds: Economic models of social learning. Cambridge University Press, 2004

    2004

  7. [15]

    Hedging in games: Faster convergence of external and swap regrets

    Xi Chen and Binghui Peng. Hedging in games: Faster convergence of external and swap regrets. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33: 0 18990--18999, 2020

    2020

  8. [16]

    Online optimization with gradual variations

    Chao-Kai Chiang, Tianbao Yang, Chia-Jung Lee, Mehrdad Mahdavi, Chi-Jen Lu, Rong Jin, and Shenghuo Zhu. Online optimization with gradual variations. In Conference on Learning Theory, pages 6--1. JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings, 2012

    2012

  9. [17]

    The price of anarchy of finite congestion games

    George Christodoulou and Elias Koutsoupias. The price of anarchy of finite congestion games. In Proceedings of the thirty-seventh annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 67--73, 2005

    2005

  10. [18]

    From external to swap regret 2.0: An efficient reduction for large action spaces

    Yuval Dagan, Constantinos Daskalakis, Maxwell Fishelson, and Noah Golowich. From external to swap regret 2.0: An efficient reduction for large action spaces. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 1216--1222, 2024

    2024

  11. [19]

    Optimal learners for multiclass problems

    Amit Daniely and Shai Shalev-Shwartz. Optimal learners for multiclass problems. In Conference on Learning Theory, pages 287--316. PMLR, 2014

    2014

  12. [20]

    Multiclass learnability and the erm principle, 2014

    Amit Daniely, Sivan Sabato, Shai Ben-David, and Shai Shalev-Shwartz. Multiclass learnability and the erm principle, 2014. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1308.2893

    2014 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Near-optimal no-regret algorithms for zero-sum games

    Constantinos Daskalakis, Alan Deckelbaum, and Anthony Kim. Near-optimal no-regret algorithms for zero-sum games. In Proceedings of the twenty-second annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 235--254. SIAM, 2011

    2011

  14. [22]

    Near-optimal no-regret learning in general games

    Constantinos Daskalakis, Maxwell Fishelson, and Noah Golowich. Near-optimal no-regret learning in general games. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34: 0 27604--27616, 2021

    2021

  15. [23]

    Donti, Brandon Amos, and J

    Priya L. Donti, Brandon Amos, and J. Zico Kolter. Task-based end-to-end model learning in stochastic optimization, 2019. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.04529

    2019 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Learning in time-varying games

    Benoit Duvocelle, Panayotis Mertikopoulos, Mathias Staudigl, and Dries Vermeulen. Learning in time-varying games. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.03066, page 17, 2018

    2018 arXiv

  17. [25]

    predict, then optimize

    Adam N. Elmachtoub and Paul Grigas. Smart "predict, then optimize", 2020. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.08005

    2020 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Clairvoyant regret minimization: Equivalence with nemirovski's conceptual prox method and extension to general convex games

    Gabriele Farina, Christian Kroer, Chung-Wei Lee, and Haipeng Luo. Clairvoyant regret minimization: Equivalence with nemirovski's conceptual prox method and extension to general convex games. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.14891, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Calibrated learning and correlated equilibrium

    Dean P Foster and Rakesh V Vohra. Calibrated learning and correlated equilibrium. Games and Economic Behavior, 21 0 (1-2): 0 40--55, 1997

    1997

  20. [28]

    Asymptotic calibration

    Dean P Foster and Rakesh V Vohra. Asymptotic calibration. Biometrika, 85 0 (2): 0 379--390, 1998

    1998

  21. [29]

    Learning in games: Robustness of fast convergence

    Dylan J Foster, Zhiyuan Li, Thodoris Lykouris, Karthik Sridharan, and Eva Tardos. Learning in games: Robustness of fast convergence. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 29, 2016

    2016

  22. [30]

    Adaptive game playing using multiplicative weights

    Yoav Freund and Robert E Schapire. Adaptive game playing using multiplicative weights. Games and Economic Behavior, 29 0 (1-2): 0 79--103, 1999

    1999

  23. [31]

    Frongillo, Grant Schoenebeck, and Omer Tamuz

    Rafael M. Frongillo, Grant Schoenebeck, and Omer Tamuz. Social learning in a changing world. In Ning Chen, Edith Elkind, and Elias Koutsoupias, editors, Internet and Network Economics, pages 146--157, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. ISBN 978-3-642-25510-6

    2011

  24. [32]

    Machine Learning in Economics and Finance

    Periklis Gogas and Theophilos Papadimitriou. Machine Learning in Economics and Finance . Computational Economics, 57 0 (1): 0 1--4, January 2021. doi:10.1007/s10614-021-10094-. URL https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/compec/v57y2021i1d10.1007_s10614-021-10094-w.html

    2021 doi

  25. [33]

    Online learning in bandits with predicted context

    Yongyi Guo, Ziping Xu, and Susan Murphy. Online learning in bandits with predicted context. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 2215--2223. PMLR, 2024

    2024

  26. [34]

    Dynamical models and tracking regret in online convex programming

    Eric Hall and Rebecca Willett. Dynamical models and tracking regret in online convex programming. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 579--587. PMLR, 2013

    2013

  27. [35]

    Time series analysis

    James D Hamilton. Time series analysis. Princeton university press, 2020

    2020

  28. [36]

    Regret minimization in stackelberg games with side information

    Keegan Harris, Zhiwei Steven Wu, and Maria-Florina Balcan. Regret minimization in stackelberg games with side information. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.08576, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    A simple adaptive procedure leading to correlated equilibrium

    Sergiu Hart and Andreu Mas-Colell. A simple adaptive procedure leading to correlated equilibrium. Econometrica, 68 0 (5): 0 1127--1150, 2000 a

    2000

  30. [38]

    A simple adaptive procedure leading to correlated equilibrium

    Sergiu Hart and Andreu Mas-Colell. A simple adaptive procedure leading to correlated equilibrium. Econometrica, 68 0 (5): 0 1127--1150, 2000 b

    2000

  31. [39]

    Uncoupled dynamics do not lead to nash equilibrium

    Sergiu Hart and Andreu Mas-Colell. Uncoupled dynamics do not lead to nash equilibrium. American Economic Review, 93 0 (5): 0 1830--1836, 2003

    2003

  32. [40]

    Online learning with prior knowledge

    Elad Hazan and Nimrod Megiddo. Online learning with prior knowledge. In Learning Theory: 20th Annual Conference on Learning Theory, COLT 2007, San Diego, CA, USA; June 13-15, 2007. Proceedings 20, pages 499--513. Springer, 2007

    2007

  33. [41]

    Elad Hazan, Tomer Koren, and Kfir Y. Levy. Logistic regression: Tight bounds for stochastic and online optimization, 2014. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1405.3843

    2014 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Geoffrey Hinton and Michael I. Jordan. Advancing healthcare, e-commerce, and computational analysis with ai- applications in diagnostics, market insights, and efficiency. AlgoVista: Journal of AI and Computer Science, 3 0 (2), Nov. 2024. URL https://algovista.org/index.php/AVJ...

    2024

  35. [43]

    Mitchell

    Michael Jordan and T.M. Mitchell. Machine learning: Trends, perspectives, and prospects. Science (New York, N.Y.), 349: 0 255--60, 07 2015. doi:10.1126/science.aaa8415

    2015 doi

  36. [44]

    Advances and open problems in federated learning

    Peter Kairouz, H Brendan McMahan, Brendan Avent, Aur \'e lien Bellet, Mehdi Bennis, Arjun Nitin Bhagoji, Kallista Bonawitz, Zachary Charles, Graham Cormode, Rachel Cummings, et al. Advances and open problems in federated learning. Foundations and trends in machine learning , 1...

    2021

  37. [45]

    Bayesian persuasion and information design

    Emir Kamenica. Bayesian persuasion and information design. Annual Review of Economics, 11 0 (1): 0 249--272, 2019

    2019

  38. [46]

    Bayesian persuasion

    Emir Kamenica and Matthew Gentzkow. Bayesian persuasion. American Economic Review, 101 0 (6): 0 2590--2615, 2011

    2011

  39. [47]

    Stochastic bandits with context distributions, 2019

    Johannes Kirschner and Andreas Krause. Stochastic bandits with context distributions, 2019. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.02685

    2019 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Bandit algorithms

    Tor Lattimore and Csaba Szepesv \'a ri. Bandit algorithms. Cambridge University Press, 2020

    2020

  41. [49]

    No-regret learning in dynamic stackelberg games

    Niklas Lauffer, Mahsa Ghasemi, Abolfazl Hashemi, Yagiz Savas, and Ufuk Topcu. No-regret learning in dynamic stackelberg games. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 2023

    2023

  42. [50]

    An efficient approach to solving the road network equilibrium traffic assignment problem

    Larry J LeBlanc, Edward K Morlok, and William P Pierskalla. An efficient approach to solving the road network equilibrium traffic assignment problem. Transportation research, 9 0 (5): 0 309--318, 1975

    1975

  43. [51]

    Stationary social learning in a changing environment

    Rapha \"e l Levy, Marcin P e ski, and Nicolas Vieille. Stationary social learning in a changing environment. Econometrica, 92 0 (6): 0 1939--1966, 2024

    1939

  44. [52]

    A contextual-bandit approach to personalized news article recommendation

    Lihong Li, Wei Chu, John Langford, and Robert E Schapire. A contextual-bandit approach to personalized news article recommendation. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web, pages 661--670, 2010

    2010

  45. [53]

    Learning quickly when irrelevant attributes abound: A new linear-threshold algorithm

    Nick Littlestone. Learning quickly when irrelevant attributes abound: A new linear-threshold algorithm. Machine learning, 2: 0 285--318, 1988

    1988

  46. [54]

    Maddux and Maryam Kamgarpour

    Anna M. Maddux and Maryam Kamgarpour. Multi-agent learning in contextual games under unknown constraints, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.14685

    2024 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Social learning equilibria

    Elchanan Mossel, Manuel Mueller-Frank, Allan Sly, and Omer Tamuz. Social learning equilibria. Econometrica, 88 0 (3): 0 1235--1267, 2020

    2020

  48. [56]

    Linearizing contextual bandits with latent state dynamics

    Elliot Nelson, Debarun Bhattac harjya, Tian Gao, Miao Liu, Djallel Bouneffouf, and Pascal Poupart. Linearizing contextual bandits with latent state dynamics. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pages 1477--1487. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  49. [57]

    Fast swap regret minimization and applications to approximate correlated equilibria, 2023

    Binghui Peng and Aviad Rubinstein. Fast swap regret minimization and applications to approximate correlated equilibria, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.19647

    2023 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Fast swap regret minimization and applications to approximate correlated equilibria

    Binghui Peng and Aviad Rubinstein. Fast swap regret minimization and applications to approximate correlated equilibria. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 1223--1234, 2024

    2024

  51. [59]

    Beyond time-average convergence: Near-optimal uncoupled online learning via clairvoyant multiplicative weights update

    Georgios Piliouras, Ryann Sim, and Stratis Skoulakis. Beyond time-average convergence: Near-optimal uncoupled online learning via clairvoyant multiplicative weights update. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35: 0 22258--22269, 2022

    2022

  52. [60]

    Online learning with predictable sequences

    Alexander Rakhlin and Karthik Sridharan. Online learning with predictable sequences. In Conference on Learning Theory, pages 993--1019. PMLR, 2013

    2013

  53. [61]

    Online learning via sequential complexities

    Alexander Rakhlin, Karthik Sridharan, and Ambuj Tewari. Online learning via sequential complexities. J. Mach. Learn. Res., 16 0 (1): 0 155--186, 2015

    2015

  54. [62]

    Intrinsic robustness of the price of anarchy

    Tim Roughgarden. Intrinsic robustness of the price of anarchy. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 62 0 (5): 0 1--42, 2015

    2015

  55. [63]

    How bad is selfish routing? Journal of the ACM (JACM), 49 0 (2): 0 236--259, 2002

    Tim Roughgarden and \'E va Tardos. How bad is selfish routing? Journal of the ACM (JACM), 49 0 (2): 0 236--259, 2002

    2002

  56. [64]

    A survey of contextual optimization methods for decision-making under uncertainty

    Utsav Sadana, Abhilash Chenreddy, Erick Delage, Alexandre Forel, Emma Frejinger, and Thibaut Vidal. A survey of contextual optimization methods for decision-making under uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research, 2024

    2024

  57. [65]

    No-regret learning in unknown games with correlated payoffs

    Pier Giuseppe Sessa, Ilija Bogunovic, Maryam Kamgarpour, and Andreas Krause. No-regret learning in unknown games with correlated payoffs. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 32, 2019

    2019

  58. [66]

    Contextual games: Multi-agent learning with side information, 2021

    Pier Giuseppe Sessa, Ilija Bogunovic, Andreas Krause, and Maryam Kamgarpour. Contextual games: Multi-agent learning with side information, 2021. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.06327

    2021 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Introduction to multi-armed bandits

    Aleksandrs Slivkins et al. Introduction to multi-armed bandits. Foundations and Trends in Machine Learning , 12 0 (1-2): 0 1--286, 2019

    2019

  60. [68]

    Pathological outcomes of observational learning

    Lones Smith and Peter S rensen. Pathological outcomes of observational learning. Econometrica, 68 0 (2): 0 371--398, 2000

    2000

  61. [69]

    Schapire

    Vasilis Syrgkanis, Alekh Agarwal, Haipeng Luo, and Robert E. Schapire. Fast convergence of regularized learning in games, 2015. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.00407

    2015 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Bandit learning with predicted context: Regret analysis and selective context query

    Jianyi Yang and Shaolei Ren. Bandit learning with predicted context: Regret analysis and selective context query. In IEEE INFOCOM 2021-IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, pages 1--10. IEEE, 2021

    2021

  63. [71]

    No-regret learning in time-varying zero-sum games

    Mengxiao Zhang, Peng Zhao, Haipeng Luo, and Zhi-Hua Zhou. No-regret learning in time-varying zero-sum games. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 26772--26808. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  64. [72]

    Online Convex Programming and Generalized Infinitesimal Gradient Ascent

    Martin Zinkevich. Online Convex Programming and Generalized Infinitesimal Gradient Ascent . In Machine Learning, Proceedings of the Twentieth International Conference (ICML 2003), August 21-24, 2003, Washington, DC, USA , 2003

    2003

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.