Learning Tree Structured Potential Games

Authors: Vikas Garg, Tommi Jaakkola

NeurIPS 2016 | Conference PDF | Archive PDF | Plain Text | LLM Run Details

Reproducibility Variable Result LLM Response
Research Type Experimental We now describe the results of our experiments on both synthetic and real data to demonstrate the efficacy of our algorithm.
Researcher Affiliation Academia Vikas K. Garg CSAIL, MIT vgarg@csail.mit.edu Tommi Jaakkola CSAIL, MIT tommi@csail.mit.edu
Pseudocode Yes Algorithm 1 Learning tree structured potential games
Open Source Code No The paper does not provide any statement about releasing the source code for its methodology or a link to a code repository.
Open Datasets Yes Publicly available at http://scdb.wustl.edu/. Publicly available at http://www.senate.gov/.
Dataset Splits No The paper uses a training set but does not specify any explicit train/validation/test dataset splits, percentages, or cross-validation methodology.
Hardware Specification No The paper does not provide specific details about the hardware (e.g., CPU, GPU models, memory) used for running the experiments.
Software Dependencies No The paper does not provide specific software dependencies with version numbers (e.g., programming languages, libraries, or solvers with their versions) used in the experiments.
Experiment Setup Yes We report below the results of our experiments with the following setting of parameters: ρ = 1, βt = 0.005 (for all t), C = 10, ϵ = 0.1, and Max Iter = 100. For each local optimization problem, the configurations were constrained to share the slack variable in order to reduce the total number of optimization variables. Moreover, we used a scaled 0-1 loss [15], e(y, ym) = 1{y = ym}/n for each local optimization. We set h = 1 for the approximate method.