mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

On the Use and Misuse of Absorbing States in Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning

arXiv 2111.05992 ↗First posted 10 Nov 2021cs.LG cs.AIcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The creation and destruction of agents in cooperative multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) is a critically under-explored area of research. Current MARL algorithms often assume that the number of agents within a group remains fixed throughout an experiment. However, in many practical problems, an agent may terminate before their teammates. This early termination issue presents a challenge: the terminated agent must learn from the group's success or failure which occurs beyond its own existence. We refer to propagating value from rewards earned by remaining teammates to terminated agents as the Posthumous Credit Assignment problem. Current MARL methods handle this problem by placing these agents in an absorbing state until the entire group of agents reaches a termination condition. Although absorbing states enable existing algorithms and APIs to handle terminated agents without modification, practical training efficiency and resource use problems exist. In this work, we first demonstrate that sample complexity increases with the quantity of absorbing states in a toy supervised learning task for a fully connected network, while attention is more robust to variable size input. Then, we present a novel architecture for an existing state-of-the-art MARL algorithm which uses attention instead of a fully connected layer with absorbing states. Finally, we demonstrate that this novel architecture significantly outperforms the standard architecture on tasks in which agents are created or destroyed within episodes as well as standard multi-agent coordination tasks.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Nov 2021.

Builds on

20 of 30 references.

References · 20

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
  3. 2016Layer Normalizationcited by 5,579
  4. 2015High-Dimensional Continuous Control Using Generalized Advantage Estimationcited by 1,916
  5. 2017Multi-Agent Actor-Critic for Mixed Cooperative-Competitive Environmentscited by 1,519
  6. 2021The Surprising Effectiveness of PPO in Cooperative, Multi-Agent Gamescited by 903
  7. 2018IMPALA: Scalable Distributed Deep-RL with Importance Weighted Actor-Learner Architecturescited by 866
  8. 2017Counterfactual Multi-Agent Policy Gradientscited by 733
  9. 2018QMIX: Monotonic Value Function Factorisation for Deep Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learningcited by 697
  10. 2019The StarCraft Multi-Agent Challengecited by 589
  11. 2017Value-Decomposition Networks For Cooperative Multi-Agent Learningcited by 490
  12. 2019Emergent Tool Use From Multi-Agent Autocurriculacited by 308
8 more
  1. 2018Distributed Prioritized Experience Replaycited by 260
  2. 2018Actor-Attention-Critic for Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learningcited by 259
  3. 2018Unity: A General Platform for Intelligent Agentscited by 232
  4. 2020PettingZoo: Gym for Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learningcited by 209
  5. 2021Contrasting Centralized and Decentralized Critics in Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learningcited by 54
  6. 2020Evolutionary Population Curriculum for Scaling Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learningcited by 47
  7. 2020Randomized Entity-wise Factorization for Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learningcited by 38
  8. 2020Towards Open Ad Hoc Teamwork Using Graph-based Policy Learningcited by 37

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 4; 2024: 1; 2025: 3.

10 papers.