Skip to main content

Beyond Local Nash Equilibria for Adversarial Networks

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Artificial Intelligence (BNAIC 2018)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 1021))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Save for some special cases, current training methods for Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) are at best guaranteed to converge to a ‘local Nash equilibrium’ (LNE). Such LNEs, however, can be arbitrarily far from an actual Nash equilibrium (NE), which implies that there are no guarantees on the quality of the found generator or classifier. This paper proposes to model GANs explicitly as finite games in mixed strategies, thereby ensuring that every LNE is an NE. We use the Parallel Nash Memory as a solution method, which is proven to monotonically converge to a resource-bounded Nash equilibrium. We empirically demonstrate that our method is less prone to typical GAN problems such as mode collapse and produces solutions that are less exploitable than those produced by GANs and MGANs.

This paper is based on a prior arXiv paper which contains further details [31].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Note that in game theory the term ‘saddle point’ is used to denote a ‘global’ saddle point which corresponds to a Nash equilibrium: there is no profitable deviation near or far away from the current point. In contrast, in machine learning, the term ‘saddle point’ typically denotes a ‘local’ saddle point: no player can improve its payoff by making a small step from the current joint strategy.

  2. 2.

    Some results on the existence of saddle points in infinite action games are known, but they require properties like convexity and concavity of utility functions [5], which we cannot apply as they would need to hold w.r.t. the neural network parameters.

  3. 3.

    By relying on Glicksberg’s theorem, we think it would be possible to extend our formulation to the continuous setting.

  4. 4.

    Therefore, our finite GANGs have the same representational capacity as normal GANs that are implemented using floating point arithmetic.

  5. 5.

    For an explanation of the precise meaning of monotonic here, we refer to [29]. Roughly, we will be ‘secure’ against more strategies of the other agent with each iteration. This does not imply that the worst case payoff for an agent also improves monotonically. The latter property, while desirable, is not possible with an approach that incrementally constructs sub-games of the full game, as considered here: there might always be a part of the game we have not seen yet, but which we might discover in the future that will lead to a very poor worst case payoff for one of the agents.

  6. 6.

    By changing the termination criterion of line 8 in Algorithm 1 into a criterion for including the newly found strategies. See the formulation in [29] for more details.

  7. 7.

    During training the RBBR functions will be used many times. However, the goal of the RB-NE is to provide a characterization of the end point of training.

  8. 8.

    This measure of exploitability was used to quantify convergence in PNM [29], and also has been used in the optimization literature [26]. It was in the context of GANs in [30], and further motivated for this purpose in [31]. Additionally, an empirical evaluation of exploitability as a measure for GANs was performed in the meantime [16], suggesting that this is a useful measure to quantify sample quality and mode collapse.

References

  1. Arjovsky, M., Bottou, L.: Towards principled methods for training generative adversarial networks. In: ICLR (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arjovsky, M., Chintala, S., Bottou, L.: Wasserstein generative adversarial networks. In: ICML (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Arora, S., Zhang, Y.: Do GANs actually learn the distribution? An empirical study, ArXiv e-prints (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Arora, S., Ge, R., Liang, Y., Ma, T., Zhang, Y.: Generalization and equilibrium in generative adversarial nets (GANs). In: ICML (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Aubin, J.P.: Optima and Equilibria: An Introduction to Nonlinear Analysis, vol. 140. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-03539-9

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Bosanský, B., Kiekintveld, C., Lisý, V., Pechoucek, M.: An exact double-oracle algorithm for zero-sum extensive-form games with imperfect information. J. AI Res. 51, 829–866 (2014)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Brown, G.W.: Iterative solution of games by fictitious play. Act. Anal. Prod. Alloc. 13(1), 374–376 (1951)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Chintala, S.: How to train a GAN? Tips and tricks to make GANs work. https://github.com/soumith/ganhacks (2016). Accessed 08 Feb 2018

  9. Danskin, J.M.: Fictitious play for continuous games revisited. Int. J. Game Theory 10(3), 147–154 (1981)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Foster, D.J., Li, Z., Lykouris, T., Sridharan, K., Tardos, E.: Learning in games: robustness of fast convergence. In: NIPS 29 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fudenberg, D., Levine, D.K.: The Theory of Learning in Games. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Ge, H., Xia, Y., Chen, X., Berry, R., Wu, Y.: Fictitious GAN: training GANs with historical models. ArXiv e-prints (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ghosh, A., Kulharia, V., Namboodiri, V.P., Torr, P.H.S., Dokania, P.K.: Multi-agent diverse generative adversarial networks. ArXiv e-prints (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Goodfellow, I., et al.: Generative adversarial nets. In: NIPS 27 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Grnarova, P., Levy, K.Y., Lucchi, A., Hofmann, T., Krause, A.: An online learning approach to generative adversarial networks. In: ICLR (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Grnarova, P., Levy, K.Y., Lucchi, A., Perraudin, N., Hofmann, T., Krause, A.: Evaluating GANs via duality. arXiv e-prints (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Heusel, M., Ramsauer, H., Unterthiner, T., Nessler, B., Hochreiter, S.: GANs trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local Nash equilibrium. In: NIPS 30 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hoang, Q., Nguyen, T.D., Le, T., Phung, D.Q.: Multi-generator generative adversarial nets. In: ICLR (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hsieh, Y.P., Liu, C., Cevher, V.: Finding mixed Nash equilibria of generative adversarial networks. ArXiv e-prints (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Im, D.J., Ma, A.H., Taylor, G.W., Branson, K.: Quantitatively evaluating GANs with divergences proposed for training. In: ICLR (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Jiwoong Im, D., Ma, H., Dongjoo Kim, C., Taylor, G.: Generative adversarial parallelization. ArXiv e-prints (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Karras, T., Aila, T., Laine, S., Lehtinen, J.: Progressive growing of GANs for improved quality, stability, and variation. In: ICLR (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Li, W., Gauci, M., Groß, R.: Turing learning: a metric-free approach to inferring behavior and its application to swarms. Swarm Intell. 10(3), 211–243 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. McMahan, H.B., Gordon, G.J., Blum, A.: Planning in the presence of cost functions controlled by an adversary. In: ICML (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Nash, J.F.: Equilibrium points in N-person games. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 36, 48–49 (1950)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Nemirovski, A., Juditsky, A., Lan, G., Shapiro, A.: Robust stochastic approximation approach to stochastic programming. SIAM J. Optim. 19(4), 1574–1609 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. von Neumann, J.: Zur Theorie der Gesellschaftsspiele. Math. Ann. 100(1), 295–320 (1928)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Odena, A., Olah, C., Shlens, J.: Conditional image synthesis with auxiliary classifier GANs. In: ICML (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Oliehoek, F.A., de Jong, E.D., Vlassis, N.: The parallel Nash memory for asymmetric games. In: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO) (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Oliehoek, F.A., Savani, R., Gallego-Posada, J., Van der Pol, E., De Jong, E.D., Groß, R.: GANGs: generative adversarial network games. ArXiv e-prints (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Oliehoek, F.A., Savani, R., Gallego-Posada, J., van der Pol, E., Gross, R.: Beyond local Nash equilibria for adversarial networks. ArXiv e-prints (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Osborne, M.J., Rubinstein, A.: Nash equilibrium. In: A Course in Game Theory. The MIT Press (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rakhlin, A., Sridharan, K.: Online learning with predictable sequences. In: COLT (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rakhlin, A., Sridharan, K.: Optimization, learning, and games with predictable sequences. In: NIPS 26 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ratliff, L.J., Burden, S.A., Sastry, S.S.: Characterization and computation of local Nash equilibria in continuous games. In: Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing. IEEE (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Salimans, T., Goodfellow, I.J., Zaremba, W., Cheung, V., Radford, A., Chen, X.: Improved techniques for training GANs. In: NIPS 29 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Shoham, Y., Leyton-Brown, K.: Multi-Agent Systems: Algorithmic, Game-Theoretic and Logical Foundations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  38. Sinn, M., Rawat, A.: Non-parametric estimation of Jensen-Shannon divergence in generative adversarial network training. In: AISTATS (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Theis, L., van den Oord, A., Bethge, M.: A note on the evaluation of generative models. In: ICLR (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Unterthiner, T., Nessler, B., Klambauer, G., Heusel, M., Ramsauer, H., Hochreiter, S.: Coulomb GANs: provably optimal Nash equilibria via potential fields. In: ICLR (2018)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research made use of a GPU donated by NVIDIA. F.A.O. is funded by EPSRC First Grant EP/R001227/1. This project had received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No. 758824—INFLUENCE).

figure b

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frans A. Oliehoek .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Oliehoek, F.A., Savani, R., Gallego, J., van der Pol, E., Groß, R. (2019). Beyond Local Nash Equilibria for Adversarial Networks. In: Atzmueller, M., Duivesteijn, W. (eds) Artificial Intelligence. BNAIC 2018. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1021. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31978-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31978-6_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-31977-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-31978-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics