Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 1110.4657

A Version of Geiringer-like Theorem for Decision Making in the Environments with Randomness and Incomplete Information

Abstract

Purpose: In recent years Monte-Carlo sampling methods, such as Monte Carlo tree search, have achieved tremendous success in model free reinforcement learning. A combination of the so called upper confidence bounds policy to preserve the "exploration vs. exploitation" balance to select actions for sample evaluations together with massive computing power to store and to update dynamically a rather large pre-evaluated game tree lead to the development of software that has beaten the top human player in the game of Go on a 9 by 9 board. Much effort in the current research is devoted to widening the range of applicability of the Monte-Carlo sampling methodology to partially observable Markov decision processes with non-immediate payoffs. The main challenge introduced by randomness and incomplete information is to deal with the action evaluation at the chance nodes due to drastic differences in the possible payoffs the same action could lead to. The aim of this article is to establish a version of a theorem that originated from population genetics and has been later adopted in evolutionary computation theory that will lead to novel Monte-Carlo sampling algorithms that provably increase the AI potential. Due to space limitations the actual algorithms themselves will be presented in the sequel papers, however, the current paper provides a solid mathematical foundation for the development of such algorithms and explains why they are so promising.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Boris Mitavskiy, Jonathan Rowe, Chris Cannings. 2011-10-20. A Version of Geiringer-like Theorem for Decision Making in the Environments with Randomness and Incomplete Information. https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.4657

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

STRUCTUREDAGENT: Planning with AND/OR Trees for Long-Horizon Web Tasks

Existing LLM-based web agents struggle on complex, long-horizon tasks due to limited in-context memory, weak planning abilities, and greedy behaviors that lead to premature termination. To address these challenges, we propose \SA{}, a hierarchical planning framework that interleaves planning and execution via dynamic $\ANDOR$ trees. The framework separates structural planning from LLM-based reasoning, enabling principled error recovery through node repair, systematic exploration of alternatives via OR nodes, and modular plans that can facilitate human intervention. On WebArena (630 tasks), \SA{} achieves a $\sim$53\% success rate vs.\ $\sim$46\% for AgentOccam, and on complex multi-constraint Amazon shopping tasks, gains reach 10\% over the strongest baseline.

cs.AI

Can Generalist Agents Automate Data Curation?

Curating training data is among the most consequential yet labor-intensive parts of modern AI development: practitioners iteratively propose, implement, evaluate, and revise data policies against noisy benchmark feedback. We ask whether generalist coding agents can automate this data-curation loop. We introduce *Curation-Bench*, an agent-centric benchmark that fixes the model, training recipe, and evaluation suite while giving agents command-line access to inspect data, implement policies, submit them to a fixed training/evaluation pipeline, and revise. In a vision-language instruction-tuning instantiation, out-of-the-box agents reach strong published data-selection baselines within ten iterations. However, trajectory analysis reveals a persistent *execution-research gap*: agents mainly tune local policy variants rather than explore new policy families, even when given strategy guides and paper references. Scaffolds requiring each iteration to cite, instantiate, and adapt a prior method shift agents toward method-guided exploration. The scaffolded agent autonomously composes -- without human design input -- a data-selection policy that outperforms strong published baselines at one-tenth their data budget. Overall, current agents can run the curation loop, but reliable data research requires scaffolded method adaptation, not open-ended prompting alone. Code and benchmark are open-sourced.

cs.AI

Self-Organizing Agent Teams Learn to Reason Together

Collective intelligence depends not only on what team members know, but also on how they organize their work. When the structure of a solution is unknown, useful roles and divisions of labor cannot be specified in advance; teams must learn from experience how to organize reasoning as it unfolds. Human teams routinely adapt this way, while existing AI agent teams rely on fixed protocols, explicit task decomposition, or routing. We introduce Self-Organizing Agent Teams (SAT), fixed teams of AI agents that learn reusable strategies from prior collaborations to organize roles, conversational phases, participation, and information flow. These strategies enable what we call collaborative computation: agents exchange, challenge, repair, and synthesize partial reasoning into solutions no member produced independently. In two independent settings, we learn teamwork strategies that transfer unchanged to unseen benchmarks, using only 15 mathematics and 25 graduate-level knowledge problems. Across five mathematics and physics benchmarks, self-organizing teams average 66.7% accuracy, versus 48.8% for their strongest member, 58.7% for compute-matched inference by that agent, and 59.0% for a perfect router over members' independent answers; on AIME 2026, they exceed this router by 13.4 points. Because gains vary across benchmarks, we ask when self-organizing collaboration helps. Across eight benchmarks, demonstrability (the organizational-psychology construct of whether a team can distinguish correct from incorrect reasoning) strongly tracks improvement over the strongest member (Spearman $ρ=0.90$, $p=0.005$): teams benefit most when correct reasoning can be recognized once it appears. More broadly, these results suggest that organization itself can become an agent capability: agent teams can learn how to reason together and produce solutions their members could not reach independently.

cs.AI