We consider a general problem where an agent is in a multi-agent environment and must plan for herself without any prior information about her opponents. At each moment, this pivotal agent is faced with a trade-off between exploiting her currently accumulated information about the other agents and exploring further to improve future (re-)planning. We propose a theoretic framework that unifies a spectrum of planners for the pivotal agent to address this trade-off. The planner at one end of this spectrum aims to find exact solutions, while those towards the other end yield approximate solutions as the problem scales up. Beyond theoretical analysis, we also implement \textbf{13} planners and conduct experiments in a specific domain called \textit{multi-agent route planning} with the number of agents \textbf{up to~50}, to compare their performaces in various scenarios. One interesting observation comes from a class of planners that we call \textit{safe-agents} and their enhanced variants by incorporating domain-specific knowledge, which is a simple special case under the proposed general framework, but performs sufficiently well in most cases. Our unified framework, as well as those induced planners, provides new insights on multi-agent decision-making, with potential applications to related areas such as mechanism design.

Conventional decision-support systems, primarily based on supervised learning, focus on outcome prediction models to recommend actions. However, they often fail to account for the complexities of multi-actor environments, where diverse and potentially conflicting stakeholder preferences must be balanced. In this paper, we propose a novel participatory framework that redefines decision-making as a multi-stakeholder optimization problem, capturing each actor's preferences through context-dependent reward functions. Our framework leverages $k$-fold cross-validation to fine-tune user-provided outcome prediction models and evaluate decision strategies, including compromise functions mediating stakeholder trade-offs. We introduce a synthetic scoring mechanism that exploits user-defined preferences across multiple metrics to rank decision-making strategies and identify the optimal decision-maker. The selected decision-maker can then be used to generate actionable recommendations for new data. We validate our framework using two real-world use cases, demonstrating its ability to deliver recommendations that effectively balance multiple metrics, achieving results that are often beyond the scope of purely prediction-based methods. Ablation studies demonstrate that our framework, with its modular, model-agnostic, and inherently transparent design, integrates seamlessly with various predictive models, reward structures, evaluation metrics, and sample sizes, making it particularly suited for complex, high-stakes decision-making contexts.

Federated reinforcement learning (FRL) allows agents to jointly learn a global decision-making policy under the guidance of a central server. While FRL has advantages, its decentralized design makes it prone to poisoning attacks. To mitigate this, Byzantine-robust aggregation techniques tailored for FRL have been introduced. Yet, in our work, we reveal that these current Byzantine-robust techniques are not immune to our newly introduced Normalized attack. Distinct from previous attacks that targeted enlarging the distance of policy updates before and after an attack, our Normalized attack emphasizes on maximizing the angle of deviation between these updates. To counter these threats, we develop an ensemble FRL approach that is provably secure against both known and our newly proposed attacks. Our ensemble method involves training multiple global policies, where each is learnt by a group of agents using any foundational aggregation rule. These well-trained global policies then individually predict the action for a specific test state. The ultimate action is chosen based on a majority vote for discrete action systems or the geometric median for continuous ones. Our experimental results across different settings show that the Normalized attack can greatly disrupt non-ensemble Byzantine-robust methods, and our ensemble approach offers substantial resistance against poisoning attacks.

Diagnosing diseases through histopathology whole slide images (WSIs) is fundamental in modern pathology but is challenged by the gigapixel scale and complexity of WSIs. Trained histopathologists overcome this challenge by navigating the WSI, looking for relevant patches, taking notes, and compiling them to produce a final holistic diagnostic. Traditional AI approaches, such as multiple instance learning and transformer-based models, fail short of such a holistic, iterative, multi-scale diagnostic procedure, limiting their adoption in the real-world. We introduce PathFinder, a multi-modal, multi-agent framework that emulates the decision-making process of expert pathologists. PathFinder integrates four AI agents, the Triage Agent, Navigation Agent, Description Agent, and Diagnosis Agent, that collaboratively navigate WSIs, gather evidence, and provide comprehensive diagnoses with natural language explanations. The Triage Agent classifies the WSI as benign or risky; if risky, the Navigation and Description Agents iteratively focus on significant regions, generating importance maps and descriptive insights of sampled patches. Finally, the Diagnosis Agent synthesizes the findings to determine the patient's diagnostic classification. Our Experiments show that PathFinder outperforms state-of-the-art methods in skin melanoma diagnosis by 8% while offering inherent explainability through natural language descriptions of diagnostically relevant patches. Qualitative analysis by pathologists shows that the Description Agent's outputs are of high quality and comparable to GPT-4o. PathFinder is also the first AI-based system to surpass the average performance of pathologists in this challenging melanoma classification task by 9%, setting a new record for efficient, accurate, and interpretable AI-assisted diagnostics in pathology. Data, code and models available at https://pathfinder-dx.github.io/

Reducing the environmental impact of cloud computing requires efficient workload distribution across geographically dispersed Data Center Clusters (DCCs) and simultaneously optimizing liquid and air (HVAC) cooling with time shift of workloads within individual data centers (DC). This paper introduces Green-DCC, which proposes a Reinforcement Learning (RL) based hierarchical controller to optimize both workload and liquid cooling dynamically in a DCC. By incorporating factors such as weather, carbon intensity, and resource availability, Green-DCC addresses realistic constraints and interdependencies. We demonstrate how the system optimizes multiple data centers synchronously, enabling the scope of digital twins, and compare the performance of various RL approaches based on carbon emissions and sustainability metrics while also offering a framework and benchmark simulation for broader ML research in sustainability.

We study resilient quantized consensus in multi-agent systems, where some agents may malfunction. The network consists of agents taking integer-valued states, and the agents' communication is subject to asynchronous updates and time delays. We utilize the quantized weighted mean subsequence reduced algorithm where agents communicate with others through multi-hop relays. We prove necessary and sufficient conditions for our algorithm to achieve the objective under the malicious and Byzantine attack models. Our approach has tighter graph conditions compared to the one-hop algorithm and the flooding-based algorithms for binary consensus. Numerical examples verify the efficacy of our algorithm.

In the past decade, motivated by the putative failure of naive self-play deep reinforcement learning (DRL) in adversarial imperfect-information games, researchers have developed numerous DRL algorithms based on fictitious play (FP), double oracle (DO), and counterfactual regret minimization (CFR). In light of recent results of the magnetic mirror descent algorithm, we hypothesize that simpler generic policy gradient methods like PPO are competitive with or superior to these FP, DO, and CFR-based DRL approaches. To facilitate the resolution of this hypothesis, we implement and release the first broadly accessible exact exploitability computations for four large games. Using these games, we conduct the largest-ever exploitability comparison of DRL algorithms for imperfect-information games. Over 5600 training runs, FP, DO, and CFR-based approaches fail to outperform generic policy gradient methods. Code is available at https://github.com/nathanlct/IIG-RL-Benchmark and https://github.com/gabrfarina/exp-a-spiel .

Power grid operation is becoming more complex due to the increase in generation of renewable energy. The recent series of Learning To Run a Power Network (L2RPN) competitions have encouraged the use of artificial agents to assist human dispatchers in operating power grids. However, the combinatorial nature of the action space poses a challenge to both conventional optimizers and learned controllers. Action space factorization, which breaks down decision-making into smaller sub-tasks, is one approach to tackle the curse of dimensionality. In this study, we propose a centrally coordinated multi-agent (CCMA) architecture for action space factorization. In this approach, regional agents propose actions and subsequently a coordinating agent selects the final action. We investigate several implementations of the CCMA architecture, and benchmark in different experimental settings against various L2RPN baseline approaches. The CCMA architecture exhibits higher sample efficiency and superior final performance than the baseline approaches. The results suggest high potential of the CCMA approach for further application in higher-dimensional L2RPN as well as real-world power grid settings.

In the last years, Federated learning (FL) has become a popular solution to train machine learning models in domains with high privacy concerns. However, FL scalability and performance face significant challenges in real-world deployments where data across devices are non-independently and identically distributed (non-IID). The heterogeneity in data distribution frequently arises from spatial distribution of devices, leading to degraded model performance in the absence of proper handling. Additionally, FL typical reliance on centralized architectures introduces bottlenecks and single-point-of-failure risks, particularly problematic at scale or in dynamic environments. To close this gap, we propose Field-Based Federated Learning (FBFL), a novel approach leveraging macroprogramming and field coordination to address these limitations through: (i) distributed spatial-based leader election for personalization to mitigate non-IID data challenges; and (ii) construction of a self-organizing, hierarchical architecture using advanced macroprogramming patterns. Moreover, FBFL not only overcomes the aforementioned limitations, but also enables the development of more specialized models tailored to the specific data distribution in each subregion. This paper formalizes FBFL and evaluates it extensively using MNIST, FashionMNIST, and Extended MNIST datasets. We demonstrate that, when operating under IID data conditions, FBFL performs comparably to the widely-used FedAvg algorithm. Furthermore, in challenging non-IID scenarios, FBFL not only outperforms FedAvg but also surpasses other state-of-the-art methods, namely FedProx and Scaffold, which have been specifically designed to address non-IID data distributions.

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) represent a breakthrough in AI problem-solving capabilities, but their effectiveness in interactive environments can be limited. This paper introduces and analyzes overthinking in LRMs. A phenomenon where models favor extended internal reasoning chains over environmental interaction. Through experiments on software engineering tasks using SWE Bench Verified, we observe three recurring patterns: Analysis Paralysis, Rogue Actions, and Premature Disengagement. We propose a framework to study these behaviors, which correlates with human expert assessments, and analyze 4018 trajectories. We observe that higher overthinking scores correlate with decreased performance, with reasoning models exhibiting stronger tendencies toward overthinking compared to non-reasoning models. Our analysis reveals that simple efforts to mitigate overthinking in agentic environments, such as selecting the solution with the lower overthinking score, can improve model performance by almost 30% while reducing computational costs by 43%. These results suggest that mitigating overthinking has strong practical implications. We suggest that by leveraging native function-calling capabilities and selective reinforcement learning overthinking tendencies could be mitigated. We also open-source our evaluation framework and dataset to facilitate research in this direction at https://github.com/AlexCuadron/Overthinking.