Cited by 410Reinforcement Learning in RoboticsAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationAdvanced Wireless Communication Technologies

Single and multi-agent deep reinforcement learning for AI-enabled wireless networks: A tutorial

Open access
Feriani, Amal, Hossain, Ekram·2021·IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials

Abstract

Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) has recently witnessed significant advances that have led to multiple successes in solving sequential decision-making problems in various domains, particularly in wireless communications. The next generation of wireless networks is expected to provide scalable, low-latency, ultra-reliable services empowered by the application of data-driven Artificial Intelligence (AI). The key enabling technologies of future wireless networks, such as intelligent meta-surfaces, aerial networks, and AI at the edge, involve more than one agent which motivates the importance of multi-agent learning techniques. Furthermore, cooperation is central to establishing self-organizing, self-sustaining, and decentralized networks. In this context, this tutorial focuses on the role of DRL with an emphasis on deep Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) for AI-enabled wireless networks. The first part of this paper will present a clear overview of the mathematical frameworks for single-agent RL and MARL. The main idea of this work is to motivate the application of RL beyond the model-free perspective which was extensively adopted in recent years. Thus, we provide a selective description of RL algorithms such as Model-Based RL (MBRL) and cooperative MARL and we highlight their potential applications in future wireless networks. Finally, we overview the state-of-the-art of MARL in fields such as Mobile Edge Computing (MEC), Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) networks, and cell-free massive MIMO, and identify promising future research directions. We expect this tutorial to stimulate more research endeavors to build scalable and decentralized systems based on MARL.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/comst.2021.3063822

Cites

123 of 123 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent literature identifies notable limitations that constrain AI Agents' scalability in complex, dynamic, multi-step, and/or cooperative scenarios.

    “While AI Agents represent a significant leap in artificial intelligence capabilities, particularly in automating narrow tasks through tool-augmented reasoning, recent literature identifies notable limitations that constrain their scalability in complex, dynamic, multi-step, and/or cooperative scenarios [141-143].”

    From AI Agents vs. Agentic AI: A Conceptual taxonomy, applications and challenges (2026) · cites this paper as [143]

    Section V.A, “Challenges and Implementation Schemes” (page not provided), identifies non-stationarity and an exponentially growing joint action space as challenges for cooperative multi-agent reinforcement learning. This supports the claim about scalability limits in dynamic, cooperative settings, but the paper addresses reinforcement-learning agents in wireless networks, not AI agents generally or tool-augmented task automation; the cited passages do not establish a distinct multi-step scalability limitation. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • AI Agents have notable limitations that constrain their scalability in complex, dynamic, multi-step, and/or cooperative scenarios.

    “While AI Agents represent a significant leap in artificial intelligence capabilities, particularly in automating narrow tasks through tool-augmented reasoning, recent literature identifies notable limitations that constrain their scalability in complex, dynamic, multi-step, and/or cooperative scenarios [143]-[145].”

    From AI Agents vs. Agentic AI: A Conceptual Taxonomy, Applications and Challenges (2025) · cites this paper as [145]

    The tutorial’s Scope and Section V-A identify non-stationarity, exponentially growing joint action spaces, and partial observability as challenges for multi-agent reinforcement learning, supporting the claim about scalability in cooperative, dynamic settings. It does not establish the same limitations for AI agents generally, including tool-augmented agents; its focus is reinforcement learning for wireless networks. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. [34]34. V. Mnih, A. P. Badia, M. Mirza, A. Graves, T. Lillicrap, T. Harley, D. Silver, and K. Kavukcuoglu, "Asynchronous methods for deep rein- forcement learning," in International conference on machine learning, pp. 1928-1937, 2016.
  2. [38]38. C. J. Watkins and P. Dayan, "Q-learning," Machine learning, vol. 8, no. 3-4, pp. 279-292, 1992.
  3. [50]50. B. Dai, N. He, Y. Pan, B. Boots, and L. Song, "Learning from conditional distributions via dual embeddings," in Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pp. 1458-1467, 2017.
  4. [55]55. P. Xu, F. Gao, and Q. Gu, "An improved convergence analysis of stochastic variance-reduced policy gradient," in Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 541-551, PMLR, 2020.
  5. [65]65. A. Zhang, S. Sukhbaatar, A. Lerer, A. Szlam, and R. Fergus, "Compos- able planning with attributes," in International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 5842-5851, 2018.
  6. [70]70. I. Mordatch and J. Hamrick, "Tutorial on model-based methods in reinforcement learning," ICML, 2020.
  7. [71]71. M. Janner, J. Fu, M. Zhang, and S. Levine, "When to trust your model: Model-based policy optimization," in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 12519-12530, 2019.
  8. [72]72. Y. Gal, R. McAllister, and C. E. Rasmussen, "Improving PILCO with bayesian neural network dynamics models," in Data-Efficient Machine Learning workshop, ICML, vol. 4, p. 34, 2016.
  9. [73]73. K. Chua, R. Calandra, R. McAllister, and S. Levine, "Deep rein- forcement learning in a handful of trials using probabilistic dynamics models," in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 4754-4765, 2018.
  10. [77]77. X. Chen, Y. Duan, R. Houthooft, J. Schulman, I. Sutskever, and P. Abbeel, "Infogan: Interpretable representation learning by informa- tion maximizing generative adversarial nets," in Advances in neural information processing systems, pp. 2172-2180, 2016.
  11. [84]84. J. Jiang and Z. Lu, "Learning attentional communication for multi- agent cooperation," in Advances in neural information processing systems, pp. 7254-7264, 2018.
  12. [88]88. R. Lowe, Y. I. Wu, A. Tamar, J. Harb, O. P. Abbeel, and I. Mor- datch, "Multi-agent actor-critic for mixed cooperative-competitive en- vironments," in Advances in neural information processing systems, pp. 6379-6390, 2017.
  13. [91]91. J. Castellini, F. A. Oliehoek, R. Savani, and S. Whiteson, "The representational capacity of action-value networks for multi-agent reinforcement learning," arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.07497, 2019. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Feriani, A., & Hossain, E.
Affiliations
University of Manitoba (CA)
Venue
IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials
Published
2021
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
1226-1252
ISSN
  • 1553-877X (ISSN-L)
  • 2373-745X
OpenAlex
W3101189765
Cited by
410
References
123
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 99 · 2024: 91 · 2023: 82 · 2022: 63 · 2021: 17
FWCI
22.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Discovery Grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Wireless Network Optimization
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Wireless Communication Technologies
Keywords
deep reinforcement learning, multi-agent reinforcement learning, model-based reinforcement learning, cooperative multi-agent learning, mobile edge computing, UAV networks, cell-free massive MIMO, intelligent metasurfaces, aerial networks, decentralized networks, sequential decision making

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review