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

Trevor Davis 0001

dblp:45/5641-1 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
3as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
0000-0001-6341-4639ORCID · corroborated

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 3 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 3 · 2 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
3 papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 100%
Artificial intelligence
3 papers
Reinforcement learning · 50% Multi-agent systems · 25% Optimization for machine learning · 25%

Topics — the 11 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › equilibrium computation
counterfactual regret minimization
0.622019
Solving Large Extensive-Form Games with Strategy Constraints · AAAI 2019
Counterfactual Regret Minimization in Sequential Security Games · AAAI 2016
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
equilibrium computation
0.622019
Solving Large Extensive-Form Games with Strategy Constraints · AAAI 2019
Counterfactual Regret Minimization in Sequential Security Games · AAAI 2016
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › regret minimization
counterfactual regret minimization
0.412020
Low-Variance and Zero-Variance Baselines for Extensive-Form Games · ICML 2020
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems › game theory
extensive-form games
0.412020
Low-Variance and Zero-Variance Baselines for Extensive-Form Games · ICML 2020
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
variance reduction
0.412020
Low-Variance and Zero-Variance Baselines for Extensive-Form Games · ICML 2020
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › equilibrium computation
extensive-form game solving
0.412019
Solving Large Extensive-Form Games with Strategy Constraints · AAAI 2019
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
security games
0.212016
Counterfactual Regret Minimization in Sequential Security Games · AAAI 2016
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
multi-agent reinforcement learning
0.212014
Using Response Functions to Measure Strategy Strength · AAAI 2014
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › multi-agent reinforcement learning
opponent modeling
0.212014
Using Response Functions to Measure Strategy Strength · AAAI 2014
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › non-cooperative game
extensive-form games
0.212014
Using Response Functions to Measure Strategy Strength · AAAI 2014
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
regret minimization
0.112016
Counterfactual Regret Minimization in Sequential Security Games · AAAI 2016

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

linear programming · 0.9incremental game generation · 0.5CFR+ · 0.5predictive baseline · 0.4monte carlo sampling · 0.4counterfactual regret minimization · 0.4no-regret algorithms · 0.4monte carlo tree search · 0.4response functions · 0.2response function · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2020 Low-Variance and Zero-Variance Baselines for Extensive-Form Games
abstract
Extensive-form games (EFGs) are a common model of multi-agent interactions with imperfect information. State-of-the-art algorithms for solving these games typically perform full walks of the game tree that can prove prohibitively slow in large games. Alternatively, sampling-based methods such as Monte Carlo Counterfactual Regret Minimization walk one or more trajectories through the tree, touching only a fraction of the nodes on each iteration, at the expense of requiring more iterations to converge due to the variance of sampled values. In this paper, we extend recent work that uses baseline estimates to reduce this variance. We introduce a framework of baseline-corrected values in EFGs that generalizes the previous work. Within our framework, we propose new baseline functions that result in significantly reduced variance compared to existing techniques. We show that one particular choice of such a function — predictive baseline — is provably optimal under certain sampling schemes. This allows for efficient computation of zero-variance value estimates even along sampled trajectories.
Trevor Davis 0001, Michael H. Bowling
ICML1
2019 Solving Large Extensive-Form Games with Strategy Constraints
abstract
Extensive-form games are a common model for multiagent interactions with imperfect information. In two-player zerosum games, the typical solution concept is a Nash equilibrium over the unconstrained strategy set for each player. In many situations, however, we would like to constrain the set of possible strategies. For example, constraints are a natural way to model limited resources, risk mitigation, safety, consistency with past observations of behavior, or other secondary objectives for an agent. In small games, optimal strategies under linear constraints can be found by solving a linear program; however, state-of-the-art algorithms for solving large games cannot handle general constraints. In this work we introduce a generalized form of Counterfactual Regret Minimization that provably finds optimal strategies under any feasible set of convex constraints. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our algorithm for finding strategies that mitigate risk in security games, and for opponent modeling in poker games when given only partial observations of private information.
Trevor Davis 0001, Kevin Waugh, Michael H. Bowling
AAAI1
2016 Counterfactual Regret Minimization in Sequential Security Games
abstract
Many real world security problems can be modelled as finite zero-sum games with structured sequential strategies and limited interactions between the players. An abstract class of games unifying these models are the normal-form games with sequential strategies (NFGSS). We show that all games from this class can be modelled as well-formed imperfect-recall extensive-form games and consequently can be solved by counterfactual regret minimization. We propose an adaptation of the CFR+ algorithm for NFGSS and compare its performance to the standard methods based on linear programming and incremental game generation. We validate our approach on two security-inspired domains. We show that with a negligible loss in precision, CFR+ can compute a Nash equilibrium with five times less computation than its competitors.
Viliam Lisý, Trevor Davis 0001, Michael H. Bowling
AAAI2
2014 Using Response Functions to Measure Strategy Strength
abstract
Extensive-form games are a powerful tool for representing complex multi-agent interactions. Nash equilibrium strategies are commonly used as a solution concept for extensive-form games, but many games are too large for the computation of Nash equilibria to be tractable. In these large games, exploitability has traditionally been used to measure deviation from Nash equilibrium, and thus strategies are aimed to achieve minimal exploitability. However, while exploitability measures a strategy's worst-case performance, it fails to capture how likely that worst-case is to be observed in practice. In fact, empirical evidence has shown that a less exploitable strategy can perform worse than a more exploitable strategy in one-on-one play against a variety of opponents. In this work, we propose a class of response functions that can be used to measure the strength of a strategy. We prove that standard no-regret algorithms can be used to learn optimal strategies for a scenario where the opponent uses one of these response functions. We demonstrate the effectiveness of this technique in Leduc Hold'em against opponents that use the UCT Monte Carlo tree search algorithm.
Trevor Davis 0001, Neil Burch, Michael H. Bowling
AAAI1