Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

James P. Bailey

dblp:221/2833 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
6as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-7207-512XORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 6 first-author · 3 since 2021Theory of computation · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
4 papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 58% Mathematical optimization · 28% Graph algorithms and graph theory · 14%
Artificial intelligence
2 papers
Motion planning and robot control · 45% Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 45% Multi-agent systems · 10%

Topics — the 12 heaviest of 12, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › pathfinding
grid-based pathfinding
0.512021
Path-length analysis for grid-based path planning · Artif. Intell. 2021
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control
path planning
0.512021
Path-length analysis for grid-based path planning · Artif. Intell. 2021
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph algorithms › path problems
shortest path algorithms
0.512021
Path-length analysis for grid-based path planning · Artif. Intell. 2021
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
regret minimization
0.522019
Fast and Furious Learning in Zero-Sum Games: Vanishing Regret with Non-Vanishing Step Sizes · NeurIPS 2019
Multiplicative Weights Update in Zero-Sum Games · EC 2018
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
learning in games
0.412020
Finite Regret and Cycles with Fixed Step-Size via Alternating Gradient Descent-Ascent · COLT 2020
Mathematical optimization
online optimization
0.412020
Finite Regret and Cycles with Fixed Step-Size via Alternating Gradient Descent-Ascent · COLT 2020
Mathematical optimization › online optimization
regret bounds
0.412020
Finite Regret and Cycles with Fixed Step-Size via Alternating Gradient Descent-Ascent · COLT 2020
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › equilibrium computation
nash equilibrium computation
0.412019
Fast and Furious Learning in Zero-Sum Games: Vanishing Regret with Non-Vanishing Step Sizes · NeurIPS 2019
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › learning in games
online learning in games
0.412019
Fast and Furious Learning in Zero-Sum Games: Vanishing Regret with Non-Vanishing Step Sizes · NeurIPS 2019
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
zero-sum game
0.312018
Multiplicative Weights Update in Zero-Sum Games · EC 2018
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems › game theory
zero-sum games
0.112019
Fast and Furious Learning in Zero-Sum Games: Vanishing Regret with Non-Vanishing Step Sizes · NeurIPS 2019
Mathematical optimization › online optimization
follow the regularized leader
0.112018
Multiplicative Weights Update in Zero-Sum Games · EC 2018

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

path-length analysis · 1.0gradient descent · 0.8adaptive stepsizes · 0.8gradient descent-ascent · 0.4fixed step-size · 0.4alternating updates · 0.4multiplicative weights update · 0.3follow-the-regularized-leader · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 On the Gale-Shapley Algorithm for Stable Matchings with a Partial Honesty Nash Refinement
James P. Bailey, Craig A. Tovey
AAMAS1
2025 The Price of Anarchy in Spatial Social Choice
James P. Bailey, Craig A. Tovey
AAMAS1
2021 Path-length analysis for grid-based path planning
James P. Bailey, Alex Nash, Craig A. Tovey, Sven Koenig
Artif. Intell.1
2020 Finite Regret and Cycles with Fixed Step-Size via Alternating Gradient Descent-Ascent
abstract
Gradient descent is arguably one of the most popular online optimization methods with a wide array of applications. However, the standard implementation where agents simultaneously update their strategies yields several undesirable properties; strategies diverge away from equilibrium and regret grows over time. In this paper, we eliminate these negative properties by considering a different implementation to obtain $O\left( \nicefrac{1}{T}\right)$ time-average regret via arbitrary fixed step-size. We obtain this surprising property by having agents take turns when updating their strategies. In this setting, we show that an agent that uses gradient descent with any linear loss function obtains bounded regret – regardless of how their opponent updates their strategies. Furthermore, we show that in adversarial settings that agents’ strategies are bounded and cycle when both are using the alternating gradient descent algorithm.
James P. Bailey, Gauthier Gidel, Georgios Piliouras
COLT1
2019 Fast and Furious Learning in Zero-Sum Games: Vanishing Regret with Non-Vanishing Step Sizes
abstract
We show for the first time that it is possible to reconcile in online learning in zero-sum games two seemingly contradictory objectives: vanishing time-average regret and non-vanishing step sizes. This phenomenon, that we coin ``fast and furious" learning in games, sets a new benchmark about what is possible both in max-min optimization as well as in multi-agent systems. Our analysis does not depend on introducing a carefully tailored dynamic. Instead we focus on the most well studied online dynamic, gradient descent. Similarly, we focus on the simplest textbook class of games, two-agent two-strategy zero-sum games, such as Matching Pennies. Even for this simplest of benchmarks the best known bound for total regret, prior to our work, was the trivial one of $O(T)$, which is immediately applicable even to a non-learning agent. Based on a tight understanding of the geometry of the non-equilibrating trajectories in the dual space we prove a regret bound of $\Theta(\sqrt{T})$ matching the well known optimal bound for adaptive step sizes in the online setting. This guarantee holds for all fixed step-sizes without having to know the time horizon in advance and adapt the fixed step-size accordingly.As a corollary, we establish that even with fixed learning rates the time-average of mixed strategies, utilities converge to their exact Nash equilibrium values. We also provide experimental evidence suggesting the stronger regret bound holds for all zero-sum games.
James P. Bailey, Georgios Piliouras
NeurIPS1
2018 Multiplicative Weights Update in Zero-Sum Games
abstract
We study the classic setting where two agents compete against each other in a zero-sum game by applying the Multiplicative Weights Update (MWU) algorithm. In a twist of the standard approach of [Freund and Schapire 1999], we focus on the K-L divergence from the equilibrium but instead of providing an upper bound about the rate of increase we provide a nonnegative lower bound for games with interior equilibria. This implies movement away from equilibria and towards the boundary. In the case of zero-sum games without interior equilibria convergence to the boundary (and in fact to the minimal product of subsimplexes that contains all Nash equilibria) follows via an orthogonal argument. In that subspace divergence from the set of NE applies for all nonequilibrium initial conditions via the first argument. We argue the robustness of this non-equilibrating behavior by considering the following generalizations: Step size: Agents may be using different and even decreasing step sizes. Dynamics: Agents may be using Follow-the-Regularized-Leader algorithms and possibly apply different regularizers (e.g. MWU versus Gradient Descent). We also consider a linearized version of MWU. More than two agents: Multiple agents can interact via arbitrary networks of zero-sum polymatrix games and their affine variants. Our results come in stark contrast with the standard interpretation of the behavior of MWU (and more generally regret minimizing dynamics) in zero-sum games, which is typically referred to as "converging to equilibrium". If equilibria are indeed predictive even for the benchmark class of zero-sum games, agents in practice must deviate robustly from the axiomatic perspective of optimization driven dynamics as captured by MWU and variants and apply carefully tailored equilibrium-seeking behavioral dynamics.
James P. Bailey, Georgios Piliouras
EC1