siddharthmb's picture
Add files using upload-large-folder tool
ffbd2fb verified
|
Raw History Blame Contribute Delete
9.96 kB
---
tags:
- negotiation
- multi-agent
- game-theory
- bayesian-agents
- belief-accuracy
configs:
- config_name: episodes
data_files:
- split: train
path: episodes.csv
- config_name: cells
data_files:
- split: train
path: cells.csv
- config_name: belief_turns
data_files:
- split: train
path: belief_turns.csv.gz
---
# 2026.RA.Pure-Rounds-Sweep — does more negotiating time help a Bayesian table close?
Five automated negotiators must agree on one package out of 256. Each holds a private score sheet and a
private walk-away threshold; a deal needs all five to accept. This corpus sweeps the one thing the frozen
campaign never varied — **the number of negotiation rounds before the forced final vote** — across
4 to 256 rounds, for the two lineups that contain no language model and therefore
cost only CPU: `all_rational` (five copies of a Bayesian agent that maintains a posterior over hypotheses
about each opponent's sheet) and `all_oracle` (five agents that are simply told every sheet).
**The headline: more time buys nothing.** Deal rate across `all_rational` deadlines 4 → 128 ([4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128])
reads 0.233 / 0.267 / 0.208 / 0.208 / 0.250 / 0.242 and normalized score 0.195 / 0.230 / 0.182 / 0.178 / 0.207 / 0.203, with
every instance-clustered interval overlapping every other. Rounds-to-agreement tracks the deadline almost
exactly (4.96 / 8.97 / 17.00 / 32.96 / 64.97 / 128.97 against forced finals one round later), so the agents use
the whole horizon and finish where they started. The mechanism is in `belief_turns.csv.gz`: belief accuracy
**peaks at turn 5–6 and then drifts slowly downward** for the rest of whatever horizon it is given, so extra
rounds deliver no extra identification of opponents, and without identification there is nothing to concede
to. The omniscient arm closes 1.000 of games at every deadline, confirming the horizon itself is not the
constraint. Full analysis: **research note 0061** in the source repo.
## What is in here
| file | rows | what it is |
|---|---:|---|
| `episodes.csv` | 1560 | one row per played negotiation: outcome, welfare, Gini, IR violations, rounds used, and per-episode belief scalars |
| `belief_turns.csv.gz` | 159015 | **the novel instrumentation** — one row per (episode, believer seat, turn): `posterior_mass_true_type`, `expected_utility_rmse`, `accept_set_f1` |
| `cells.csv` | 13 | per-cell aggregates with instance-clustered 95% intervals |
| `episodes/<cell_id>.jsonl.gz` | 13 files | complete episode records — every turn, parsed action, and belief block |
| `bank/` | 24 | the frozen instance bank, without which surplus columns cannot be recomputed |
Key columns: `experiment_name` (append-safe grouping), `cell_id`, `arm`, `deadline_rounds`, `host`,
`instance_id`, `seed`, `deal_rate`, `normalized_primary` (realized normalized utilitarian welfare over the
instance's feasible ceiling; a no-deal scores 0), `rounds_to_agreement`, `belief_auc_accept_set_f1`.
### Reproducing the headline belief-accuracy numbers
The belief-F1 figures quoted in research note 0061 (0.210 / 0.228 / 0.241 / 0.244 / 0.241 / 0.235 across
`all_rational` deadlines [4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128]) are **`cells.csv.belief_auc_accept_set_f1`** — a per-episode
time-average, then aggregated across episodes. Taking a flat mean of the `accept_set_f1` column in
`belief_turns.csv.gz` instead runs about 0.003 lower at every deadline, because that weights turns equally
rather than episodes and so over-weights long episodes. Both are defensible summaries of the same data; use
`cells.csv` to match the published table.
**Read that column as a time-average, not as "how much this cell learned".** The per-turn curve in
`belief_turns.csv.gz` peaks at turn 5–6 at the same value (~0.252) in every cell from 32 rounds up, then
drifts down for the rest of the horizon — at 128 rounds it falls monotonically across the whole game,
0.243 → 0.226 in eight blocks, ending 0.024 below its peak. A longer cell therefore averages in more of the
decayed tail and posts a *lower* number (r128's 0.235 against r32's 0.244) while having learned exactly as
much, exactly as fast. The decay is not a composition artifact: 119 of the 120 r128 episodes contribute all
129 turns.
## Experiment-name mapping
| experiment_name | description |
|---|---|
| `pure-rounds-sweep-v1` | the 13 complete cells below — `all_oracle` at [4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256], `all_rational` at [4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128] — at 120 episodes each (24 frozen parameter sets × seeds 0–4), unanimity, private information. The grid is deliberately incomplete: `all_rational` at [256] rounds is absent (see Provenance). |
| cell | arm | deadline | episodes | host | deal rate | score |
|---|---|---:|---:|---|---:|---:|
| `all_oracle_r4` | all_oracle | 4 | 120 | tiger7 | 1.000 | 0.888 |
| `all_oracle_r8` | all_oracle | 8 | 120 | tiger7 | 1.000 | 0.884 |
| `all_oracle_r16` | all_oracle | 16 | 120 | tiger7 | 1.000 | 0.877 |
| `all_oracle_r32` | all_oracle | 32 | 120 | tiger7 | 1.000 | 0.899 |
| `all_oracle_r64` | all_oracle | 64 | 120 | tiger7 | 1.000 | 0.890 |
| `all_oracle_r128` | all_oracle | 128 | 120 | tiger7 | 1.000 | 0.884 |
| `all_oracle_r256` | all_oracle | 256 | 120 | tiger7 | 1.000 | 0.877 |
| `all_rational_r4` | all_rational | 4 | 120 | jagupard29 | 0.233 | 0.195 |
| `all_rational_r8` | all_rational | 8 | 120 | viscam1 | 0.267 | 0.230 |
| `all_rational_r16` | all_rational | 16 | 120 | jagupard34 | 0.208 | 0.182 |
| `all_rational_r32` | all_rational | 32 | 120 | jagupard34 | 0.208 | 0.178 |
| `all_rational_r64` | all_rational | 64 | 120 | iliad1 | 0.250 | 0.207 |
| `all_rational_r128` | all_rational | 128 | 120 | john13 | 0.242 | 0.203 |
## Two caveats that change how these numbers read
1. **`all_oracle` is a flat control for AGGREGATES ONLY.** Closure and mean score are horizon-invariant, but
per episode — same host, same instance and seed — it lands on materially different deals at different
deadlines (91–97 of 120 differ, median |Δscore| 0.14). Do not run a paired within-episode oracle contrast
across deadlines. Its small residual aggregate variation is periodic in `(deadline + 1) mod 5`, the
identity of the rotating seat that holds the forced final.
2. **Episode-level identity is host-dependent.** Around 3–6% of episodes in the `all_rational` arm sit on
near-ties whose resolution depends on the host CPU's float-summation order, usually flipping a whole
deal/no-deal outcome. The `host` column is provided for that reason; aggregate comparisons are unaffected
(the `rounds=4` cells are statistically indistinguishable from the frozen campaign), but episode-level
pairing across cells on different hosts is not clean. The `all_oracle` arm is unaffected.
## Regenerating this
```bash
# create the grid sweep, fan it out across Slurm CPU nodes, then close any preemption holes
uv run python experiments/rational_agents/launch_rounds_sweep.py --create-only
experiments/rational_agents/submit_rounds_sweep.sh --sweep-id <entity>/<project>/<id> --jobs 5 --cpus 16 \
-- --shards-per-cell 16 --shard-timeout-s 10800 --bootstrap-samples 2000
uv run python experiments/rational_agents/launch_rounds_sweep.py --sweep-id <id> --fill-missing
# then package and upload
uv run python experiments/rational_agents/package_hf_rounds_sweep.py --out /tmp/rounds_sweep_hf
uv run python experiments/rational_agents/upload_hf_publication.py --folder /tmp/rounds_sweep_hf --repo siddharthmb/2026.RA.Pure-Rounds-Sweep
```
## Provenance
- **W&B sweeps** (a real `method: grid` sweep over arm × rounds, one run per cell, plus the fill passes — a
killed sweep run never releases its grid point, so a refilled cell appears under its own sweep id):
- https://wandb.ai/siddharth-stanford/rational_agents/sweeps/ufrdew0j — the original arm x rounds grid sweep — 12 cells
- https://wandb.ai/siddharth-stanford/rational_agents/sweeps/l1f1larz — fill pass for all_rational at 128 rounds — the 13th cell
- https://wandb.ai/siddharth-stanford/rational_agents/sweeps/txi1tje1 — fill pass for all_rational at 256 rounds — cancelled, produced no cell
- **Cluster artifacts:** `/nlp/scr/siddharth/ii_mats/rational_agents/pure_rounds_sweep_v1/` — per-cell run
directories in the ordinary schema, per-cell records under `control/cells/`, manifest at
`control/campaign_manifest.json` (status `partial-final-13`)
- **Slurm logs:** `/juice2/u/siddharth/ii_mats/logs/rounds_sweep/<jobid>.out`, first line of each is the exact
invocation
- **Bank:** `experiments/rational_agents/instances_five_seat_private_v2`, manifest SHA-256
`cd32ebdef8072da3…`
- **Known gap, permanent:** `all_rational_r256` is absent and **will not be run**. Its cost is superlinear in
the deadline for an engine reason, not a solver one: the runner re-serializes the entire growing episode
record once per wave, so a single r256 record reaches ~0.9 GB (against ~0.18 GB at r128) and each shard
worker holds 16–17 GB resident. Sixteen concurrent shards then exceed the job's 64 GB cgroup and are
OOM-killed. The fill reached 64 of 120 episodes in 98 hours (0.65 episodes/h against r128's 7.86, a 12×
slowdown) with 12 of 16 workers already dead, and was cancelled on 2026-08-24. Nothing rests on it: the
horizon null is flat over five octaves (4 → 128) and belief accuracy has peaked and begun decaying by turn
6, so r256 would be confirmatory only. Re-running it needs the engine fix first, not more wall clock.
## Related
- `siddharthmb/2026.RA.Quorum-Rounds-Sweep` — the agreement-rule axis: relaxing unanimity *does* move closure
(0.217 → 0.908), which is the contrast that makes this null informative
- `siddharthmb/2026.RA.Agent-Variants-Closure` — the preference-sharing axis, the other lever that works
- `siddharthmb/2026.RA.Five-Seat-Frontier-Negotiation` — the frozen campaign these cells are anchored against