SOTAVerified

The StarCraft Multi-Agent Challenge

2019-02-11Code Available1· sign in to hype

Mikayel Samvelyan, Tabish Rashid, Christian Schroeder de Witt, Gregory Farquhar, Nantas Nardelli, Tim G. J. Rudner, Chia-Man Hung, Philip H. S. Torr, Jakob Foerster, Shimon Whiteson

Code Available — Be the first to reproduce this paper.

Reproduce

Code

Abstract

In the last few years, deep multi-agent reinforcement learning (RL) has become a highly active area of research. A particularly challenging class of problems in this area is partially observable, cooperative, multi-agent learning, in which teams of agents must learn to coordinate their behaviour while conditioning only on their private observations. This is an attractive research area since such problems are relevant to a large number of real-world systems and are also more amenable to evaluation than general-sum problems. Standardised environments such as the ALE and MuJoCo have allowed single-agent RL to move beyond toy domains, such as grid worlds. However, there is no comparable benchmark for cooperative multi-agent RL. As a result, most papers in this field use one-off toy problems, making it difficult to measure real progress. In this paper, we propose the StarCraft Multi-Agent Challenge (SMAC) as a benchmark problem to fill this gap. SMAC is based on the popular real-time strategy game StarCraft II and focuses on micromanagement challenges where each unit is controlled by an independent agent that must act based on local observations. We offer a diverse set of challenge maps and recommendations for best practices in benchmarking and evaluations. We also open-source a deep multi-agent RL learning framework including state-of-the-art algorithms. We believe that SMAC can provide a standard benchmark environment for years to come. Videos of our best agents for several SMAC scenarios are available at: https://youtu.be/VZ7zmQ_obZ0.

Tasks

Benchmark Results

DatasetModelMetricClaimedVerifiedStatus
SMAC 27m_vs_30mHeuristicMedian Win Rate0Unverified
SMAC 3s5z_vs_3s6zVDNMedian Win Rate2Unverified
SMAC 3s5z_vs_3s6zIQLMedian Win Rate0Unverified
SMAC 3s5z_vs_3s6zVDNMedian Win Rate89.2Unverified
SMAC 3s5z_vs_3s6zIQLMedian Win Rate29.83Unverified
SMAC 3s5z_vs_3s6zHeuristicMedian Win Rate0Unverified
SMAC 6h_vs_8zHeuristicMedian Win Rate0Unverified
SMAC 6h_vs_8zVDNMedian Win Rate0Unverified
SMAC 6h_vs_8zIQLMedian Win Rate0Unverified
SMAC corridorHeuristicMedian Win Rate0Unverified
SMAC corridorIQLMedian Win Rate0Unverified
SMAC corridorIQLMedian Win Rate84.87Unverified
SMAC MMM2HeuristicMedian Win Rate0Unverified
SMAC MMM2VDNMedian Win Rate1Unverified
SMAC MMM2IQLMedian Win Rate0Unverified
SMAC MMM2VDNMedian Win Rate89.2Unverified
SMAC MMM2IQLMedian Win Rate68.92Unverified

Reproductions