Impact of Decentralized Learning on Player Utilities in Stackelberg Games
Kate Donahue, Nicole Immorlica, Meena Jagadeesan, Brendan Lucier, Aleksandrs Slivkins
Abstract
When deployed in the world, a learning agent such as a recommender system or a chatbot often repeatedly interacts with another learning agent (such as a user) over time. In many such two-agent systems, each agent learns separately and the rewards of the two agents are not perfectly aligned. To better understand such cases, we examine the learning dynamics of the two-agent system and the implications for each agent's objective. We model these systems as Stackelberg games with decentralized learning and show that standard regret benchmarks (such as Stackelberg equilibrium payoffs) result in worst-case linear regret for at least one player. To better capture these systems, we construct a relaxed regret benchmark that is tolerant to small learning errors by agents. We show that standard learning algorithms fail to provide sublinear regret, and we develop algorithms to achieve near-optimal regret for both players with respect to these benchmarks. We further design relaxed environments under which faster learning () is possible. Altogether, our results take a step towards assessing how two-agent interactions in sequential and decentralized learning environments affect the utility of both agents.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext d77b12ea-0510-4664-a7d2-cfab07cc71caCited by top-tier papers4
- Nearly-Optimal Bandit Learning in Stackelberg Games with Side InformationNina Balcan, Martino Bernasconi, Matteo Castiglioni, Andrea Celli et al.ICLR 2026 · 9 citations
- Is Knowledge Power? On the (Im)possibility of Learning from Strategic InteractionsNivasini Ananthakrishnan, Nika Haghtalab, Chara Podimata, Kunhe YangNeurIPS 2024 · 9 citations
- Learning to Mitigate Externalities: the Coase Theorem with Hindsight RationalityAntoine Scheid, Aymeric Capitaine, Etienne Boursier, Eric Moulines et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 7 citations
- The Burden of Interactive Alignment with Inconsistent PreferencesAli ShiraliNeurIPS 2025 · 2 citations
Builds on28
- Does the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team PerformanceGagan Bansal, Tongshuang Wu, Joyce Zhou, Raymond Fok et al.CHI 2021 · 713 citations
- Performative PredictionJuan C. Perdomo, Tijana Zrnic, Celestine Mendler-Dünner, Moritz HardtICML 2020 · 422 citations
- Fine-tuning language models to find agreement among humans with diverse preferencesMichiel A. Bakker, Martin J. Chadwick, Hannah Sheahan, Michael Henry Tessler et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 349 citations
- Near-Optimal No-Regret Learning in General GamesConstantinos Daskalakis, Maxwell Fishelson, Noah GolowichNeurIPS 2021 · 141 citations
- Outside the Echo Chamber: Optimizing the Performative RiskJohn Miller, Juan C. Perdomo, Tijana ZrnicICML 2021 · 128 citations
Related papers
- Learning Strategy-Aware Linear ClassifiersYiling Chen, Yang Liu, Chara PodimataNeurIPS 2020 · 110 citations
- Is Learning in Games Good for the Learners?William Brown, Jon Schneider, Kiran VodrahalliNeurIPS 2023 · 27 citations
- Online Learning in Stackelberg Games with an Omniscient FollowerGeng Zhao, Banghua Zhu, Jiantao Jiao, Michael I. JordanICML 2023 · 23 citations
- Learning to Steer Learners in GamesYizhou Zhang, Yian Ma, Eric MazumdarICML 2025
- Sample-Efficient Learning of Stackelberg Equilibria in General-Sum GamesYu Bai, Chi Jin, Huan Wang, Caiming XiongNeurIPS 2021 · 81 citations
