user: text: Write a concise one-sentence TLDR summary of the scientific paper content below.

Title: Can Deep Reinforcement Learning solve Erdos-Selfridge-Spencer Games?

Paper content:
Deep reinforcement learning has achieved many recent successes, but our understanding of its strengths and limitations is hampered by the lack of rich environments in which we can fully characterize optimal behavior, and correspondingly diagnose individual actions against such a characterization.
Here we consider a family of combinatorial games, arising from work of Erdos, Selfridge, and Spencer, and we propose their use as environments for evaluating and comparing different approaches to reinforcement learning.
These games have a number of appealing features: they are challenging for current learning approaches, but they form
(i) a low-dimensional, simply parametrized environment where
(ii) there is a linear closed form solution for optimal behavior from any state, and
(iii) the difficulty of the game can be tuned by changing environment parameters in an interpretable way.
We use these Erdos-Selfridge-Spencer games not only to compare different algorithms, but also to compare approaches based on supervised and reinforcement learning, to analyze the power of multi-agent approaches in improving performance, and to evaluate generalization to environments outside the training set.
Deep reinforcement learning has seen many remarkable successes over the past few years BID5 BID9 .
But developing learning algorithms that are robust across tasks and policy representations remains a challenge.
Standard benchmarks like MuJoCo and Atari provide rich settings for experimentation, but the specifics of the underlying environments differ from each other in many different ways, and hence determining the principles underlying any particular form of sub-optimal behavior is difficult.
Optimal behavior in these environments is generally complex and not fully characterized, so algorithmic success is generally associated with high scores, making it hard to analyze where errors are occurring in any sort of fine-grained sense.An ideal setting for studying the strengths and limitations of reinforcement learning algorithms would be
(i) a simply parametrized family of environments where
(ii) optimal behavior can be completely characterized,
(iii) the inherent difficulty of computing optimal behavior is tightly controlled by the underlying parameters, and
(iv) at least some portions of the parameter space produce environments that are hard for current algorithms.
To produce such a family of environments, we look in a novel direction -to a set of two-player combinatorial games with their roots in work of Erdos and Selfridge BID3 , and placed on a general footing by BID10 .
Roughly speaking, these Erdos-Selfridge-Spencer (ESS) games are games in which two players take turns selecting objects from some combinatorial structure, with the feature that optimal strategies can be defined by potential functions derived from conditional expectations over random future play.These ESS games thus provide an opportunity to capture the general desiderata noted above, with a clean characterization of optimal behavior and a set of instances that range from easy to very hard as we sweep over a simple set of tunable parameters.
We focus in particular on one of the best-known games in this genre, Spencer's attacker-defender game (also known as the "tenure game"; BID10 , in which -roughly speaking -an attacker advances a set of pieces up the levels of a board, while a defender destroys subsets of these pieces to try prevent any of them from reaching the final level ( FIG0 ).
An instance of the game can be parametrized by two key quantities.
The first is the number of levels K, which determines both the size of the state space and the approximate length of the game; the latter is directly related to the sparsity of win/loss signals as rewards.
The second quantity is a potential function φ, whose magnitude characterizes whether the instance favors the defender or attacker, and how much "margin of error" there is in optimal play.The environment therefore allows us to study learning by the defender, or by the attacker, or in a multi-agent formulation where the defender and attacker are learning concurrently.
Because we have a move-by-move characterization of optimal play, we can go beyond simple measures of reward based purely on win/loss outcomes and use supervised learning techniques to pinpoint the exact location of the errors in a trajectory of play.
In the process, we are able to develop insights about the robustness of solutions to changes in the environment.
These types of analyses have been long-standing goals, but they have generally been approached much more abstractly, given the difficulty in characterizing step-by-step optimally in non-trivial environments such as this one.The main contributions of this work are thus the following:1.
The development of these combinatorial games as environments for studying the behavior of reinforcement learning algorithms, with sensitive control over the difficulty of individual instances using a small set of natural parameters.2.
A comparison of the performance of an agent trained using deep RL to the performance of an agent trained using supervised learning on move-by-move decisions.
Exploiting the fact that we can characterize optimal play at the level of individual moves, we find an intriguing phenomenon: while the supervised learning agent is, not surprisingly, more accurate on individual move decisions than the deep RL agent, the deep RL agent is better at playing the game!
We further interpret this result by studying fatal mistakes.3.
An investigation of the way in which the success of one of the two players (defender or attacker) in training turns out to depend crucially on the algorithm being used to implement the other player.
We explore properties of this other player's algorithm, and also properties of mulitagent learning, that lead to more robust policies with better generalization.
This is a largely empirical paper, building on a theoretically grounded environment derived from a combinatorial game.
We present learning and generalization experiments for a variety of commonly used model architectures and learning algorithms.
We aim to show that despite the simple structure of the game, it provides both significant challenges for standard reinforcement learning approaches and a number of tools for precisely understanding those challenges.
In this paper, we have proposed Erdos-Selfridge-Spencer games as rich environments for investigating reinforcement learning, exhibiting continuously tunable difficulty and an exact combinatorial characterization of optimal behavior.
We have demonstrated that algorithms can exhibit wide variation in performance as we tune the game's difficulty, and we use the characterization of optimal behavior to expose intriguing contrasts between performance in supervised learning and reinforcement learning approaches.
Having reformulated the results to enable a trainable attacker, we have also been able to explore insights on overfitting, generalization, and multiagent learning.
We also develop further results in the Appendix, including an analysis of catastrophic forgetting, generalization across different values of the game's parameters, and a method for investigating measures of the model's confidence.
We believe that this family of combinatorial games can be used as a rich environment for gaining further insights into deep reinforcement learning.
On the left we train on different potentials and test on potential 0.99.
We find that training on harder games leads to better performance, with the agent trained on the easiest potential generalizing worst and the agent trained on a harder potential generalizing best.
This result is consistent across different choices of test potentials.
The right pane shows the effect of training on a larger K and testing on smaller K. We see that performance appears to be inversely proportional to the difference between the train K and test K.

assistant: text: We adapt a family of combinatorial games with tunable difficulty and an optimal policy expressible as linear network, developing it as a rich environment for reinforcement learning, showing contrasts in performance with supervised learning, and analyzing multiagent learning and generalization.