6,812 research outputs found
Approximate Equilibrium and Incentivizing Social Coordination
We study techniques to incentivize self-interested agents to form socially
desirable solutions in scenarios where they benefit from mutual coordination.
Towards this end, we consider coordination games where agents have different
intrinsic preferences but they stand to gain if others choose the same strategy
as them. For non-trivial versions of our game, stable solutions like Nash
Equilibrium may not exist, or may be socially inefficient even when they do
exist. This motivates us to focus on designing efficient algorithms to compute
(almost) stable solutions like Approximate Equilibrium that can be realized if
agents are provided some additional incentives. Our results apply in many
settings like adoption of new products, project selection, and group formation,
where a central authority can direct agents towards a strategy but agents may
defect if they have better alternatives. We show that for any given instance,
we can either compute a high quality approximate equilibrium or a near-optimal
solution that can be stabilized by providing small payments to some players. We
then generalize our model to encompass situations where player relationships
may exhibit complementarities and present an algorithm to compute an
Approximate Equilibrium whose stability factor is linear in the degree of
complementarity. Our results imply that a little influence is necessary in
order to ensure that selfish players coordinate and form socially efficient
solutions.Comment: A preliminary version of this work will appear in AAAI-14:
Twenty-Eighth Conference on Artificial Intelligenc
Evolution and Walrasian Behavior in Market Games
We revisit the question of price formation in general equilibrium theory. We explore whether evolutionary forces lead to Walrasian equilibrium in the context of a market game, introduced by Shubik (1972). Market games have Pareto inferior (strict) Nash equilibria, in which some, and possibly all, markets are closed. We introduce a strong version of evolutionary stable strategies (SESS) for finite populations. Our concept requires stability against multiple, simultaneous mutations. We show that the introduction of a small number of ``trading mutants'' is sufficient for Pareto improving trade to be generated. Provided that agents lack market power, Nash equilibria corresponding to approximate Walrasian equilibria constitute the only approximate SESS.
Strong Nash Equilibria in Games with the Lexicographical Improvement Property
We introduce a class of finite strategic games with the property that every
deviation of a coalition of players that is profitable to each of its members
strictly decreases the lexicographical order of a certain function defined on
the set of strategy profiles. We call this property the Lexicographical
Improvement Property (LIP) and show that it implies the existence of a
generalized strong ordinal potential function. We use this characterization to
derive existence, efficiency and fairness properties of strong Nash equilibria.
We then study a class of games that generalizes congestion games with
bottleneck objectives that we call bottleneck congestion games. We show that
these games possess the LIP and thus the above mentioned properties. For
bottleneck congestion games in networks, we identify cases in which the
potential function associated with the LIP leads to polynomial time algorithms
computing a strong Nash equilibrium. Finally, we investigate the LIP for
infinite games. We show that the LIP does not imply the existence of a
generalized strong ordinal potential, thus, the existence of SNE does not
follow. Assuming that the function associated with the LIP is continuous,
however, we prove existence of SNE. As a consequence, we prove that bottleneck
congestion games with infinite strategy spaces and continuous cost functions
possess a strong Nash equilibrium
- …