IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2010.10901.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On Information Asymmetry in Competitive Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning: Convergence and Optimality

Author

Listed:
  • Ezra Tampubolon
  • Haris Ceribasic
  • Holger Boche

Abstract

In this work, we study the system of interacting non-cooperative two Q-learning agents, where one agent has the privilege of observing the other's actions. We show that this information asymmetry can lead to a stable outcome of population learning, which generally does not occur in an environment of general independent learners. The resulting post-learning policies are almost optimal in the underlying game sense, i.e., they form a Nash equilibrium. Furthermore, we propose in this work a Q-learning algorithm, requiring predictive observation of two subsequent opponent's actions, yielding an optimal strategy given that the latter applies a stationary strategy, and discuss the existence of the Nash equilibrium in the underlying information asymmetrical game.

Suggested Citation

  • Ezra Tampubolon & Haris Ceribasic & Holger Boche, 2020. "On Information Asymmetry in Competitive Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning: Convergence and Optimality," Papers 2010.10901, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2021.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2010.10901
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2010.10901
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. S. Rasoul Etesami & Tamer Başar, 2019. "Dynamic Games in Cyber-Physical Security: An Overview," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 884-913, December.
    2. David Aboody & Baruch Lev, 2000. "Information Asymmetry, R&D, and Insider Gains," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(6), pages 2747-2766, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Morricone, Serena & Munari, Federico & Oriani, Raffaele & de Rassenfosse, Gaetan, 2017. "Commercialization Strategy and IPO Underpricing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1133-1141.
    2. Zhang, Wei, 2015. "R&D investment and distress risk," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 94-114.
    3. Z. Jun Lin & Shengqiang Liu & Fangcheng Sun, 2017. "The Impact of Financing Constraints and Agency Costs on Corporate R&D Investment: Evidence from China," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 17(1), pages 3-42, March.
    4. Matteo Aquilina & Giulio Cornelli & Marina Sanchez del Villar, 2024. "Regulation, information asymmetries and the funding of new ventures," BIS Working Papers 1162, Bank for International Settlements.
    5. Alam, Ashraful & Uddin, Moshfique & Yazdifar, Hassan & Shafique, Sujana & Lartey, Theophilus, 2020. "R&D investment, firm performance and moderating role of system and safeguard: Evidence from emerging markets," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 94-105.
    6. Cho, Jaemin & Lee, Jaeho, 2013. "The venture capital certification role in R&D: Evidence from IPO underpricing in Korea," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 83-108.
    7. David J. Brophy & Paige P. Ouimet & Clemens Sialm, 2004. "PIPE Dreams? The Performance of Companies Issuing Equity Privately," NBER Working Papers 11011, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Shao‐Chi Chang & Tsai‐Yen Chung & Wen‐Chun Lin, 2010. "Underwriter reputation, earnings management and the long‐run performance of initial public offerings," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 50(1), pages 53-78, March.
    9. Guttentag Michael, 2007. "Accuracy Enhancement, Agency Costs, and Disclosure Regulation," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 611-641, December.
    10. Chen-Lung Chin & Picheng Lee & Gary Kleinman & Pei-Yu Chen, 2006. "IPO anomalies and innovation capital," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 67-91, August.
    11. Yang, Tina & Zhao, Shan, 2014. "CEO duality and firm performance: Evidence from an exogenous shock to the competitive environment," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 534-552.
    12. Zhe Li & Oksana Pryshchepa & Bo Wang, 2023. "Financial experts on the top management team: Do they reduce investment inefficiency?," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1-2), pages 198-235, January.
    13. Semih Tartaroglu & Michael Imhof, 2017. "Insider trading and response to earnings announcements: the impact of accelerated disclosure requirements," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 315-336, August.
    14. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Oriani, Raffaele, 2006. "Does the market value R&D investment by European firms? Evidence from a panel of manufacturing firms in France, Germany, and Italy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 971-993, September.
    15. Sadok El Ghoul & Omrane Guedhami & Robert Nash & He (Helen) Wang, 2022. "Economic policy uncertainty and insider trading," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 45(4), pages 817-854, December.
    16. Lee, Eugenia Y. & Ha, Wonsuk & Park, Sunyoung, 2023. "Auditor specialization in R&D and clients’ R&D investment-q sensitivity," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2).
    17. Huasheng Gao & Huai Zhang & Jin Zhang, 2018. "Employee turnover likelihood and earnings management: evidence from the inevitable disclosure doctrine," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 1424-1470, December.
    18. Sangil Kim & Jungmin Yoo, 2017. "Does R&D Expenditure with Heavy Related Party Transactions Harm Firm Value?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-15, July.
    19. Guo, Bing & Pérez-Castrillo, David & Toldrà-Simats, Anna, 2019. "Firms’ innovation strategy under the shadow of analyst coverage," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(2), pages 456-483.
    20. Rahman, Dewan & Malik, Ihtisham & Ali, Searat & Iqbal, Jamshed, 2021. "Do co-opted boards increase insider profitability?," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2010.10901. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.