4,798 research outputs found
Hard and Soft Preparation Sets in Boolean Games
A fundamental problem in game theory is the possibility of reaching equilibrium outcomes with undesirable properties, e.g., inefficiency. The economics literature abounds with models that attempt to modify games in order to avoid such undesirable properties, for example through the use of subsidies and taxation, or by allowing players to undergo a bargaining phase before their decision. In this paper, we consider the effect of such transformations in Boolean games with costs, where players control propositional variables that they can set to true or false, and are primarily motivated to seek the satisfaction of some goal formula, while secondarily motivated to minimise the costs of their actions. We adopt (pure) preparation sets (prep sets) as our basic solution concept. A preparation set is a set of outcomes that contains for every player at least one best response to every outcome in the set. Prep sets are well-suited to the analysis of Boolean games, because we can naturally represent prep sets as propositional formulas, which in turn allows us to refer to prep formulas. The preference structure of Boolean games with costs makes it possible to distinguish between hard and soft prep sets. The hard prep sets of a game are sets of valuations that would be prep sets in that game no matter what the cost function of the game was. The properties defined by hard prep sets typically relate to goal-seeking behaviour, and as such these properties cannot be eliminated from games by, for example, taxation or subsidies. In contrast, soft prep sets can be eliminated by an appropriate system of incentives. Besides considering what can happen in a game by unrestricted manipulation of players’ cost function, we also investigate several mechanisms that allow groups of players to form coalitions and eliminate undesirable outcomes from the game, even when taxes or subsidies are not a possibility
Hard and soft preparation sets in Boolean games
A fundamental problem in game theory is the possibility of reaching equi- librium outcomes with undesirable properties, e.g., inefficiency. The economics literature abounds with models that attempt to modify games in order to avoid such undesirable properties, for example through the use of subsidies and taxation, or by allowing players to undergo a bargaining phase before their decision. In this paper, we consider the effect of such transformations in Boolean games with costs, where players control propositional variables that they can set to true or false, and are primarily motivated to seek the sat- isfaction of some goal formula, while secondarily motivated to minimise the costs of their actions. We adopt (pure) preparation sets (prep sets) as our basic solution concept. A preparation set is a set of outcomes that contains for every player at least one best re- sponse to every outcome in the set. Prep sets are well-suited to the analysis of Boolean games, because we can naturally represent prep sets as propositional formulas, which in turn allows us to refer to prep formulas . The preference structure of Boolean games with costs makes it possible to distinguish between hard and soft prep sets. The hard prep sets of a game are sets of valuations that would be prep sets in that game no matter what the cost function of the game was. The properties defined by hard prep sets typically relate to goal-seeking behaviour, and as such these properties cannot be eliminated from games by, for example, taxation or subsidies. In contrast, soft prep sets can be eliminated by an appropriate system of incentives. Besides considering what can happen in a game by unrestricted manipulation of players’ cost function, we also investigate several mechanisms that allow groups of players to form coalitions and eliminate undesirable outcomes from the game, even when taxes or subsidies are not a possibility
Characterising the manipulability of Boolean games
The existence of (Nash) equilibria with undesirable properties is a well-known problem in game theory, which has motivated much research directed at the possibility of mechanisms for modifying games in order to eliminate undesirable equilibria, or induce desirable ones. Taxation schemes are a well-known mechanism for modifying games in this way. In the multi-agent systems community, taxation mechanisms for incentive engineering have been studied in the context of Boolean games with costs. These are games in which each player assigns truth-values to a set of propositional variables she uniquely controls in pursuit of satisfying an individual propositional goal formula; different choices for the player are also associated with different costs. In such a game, each player prefers primarily to see the satisfaction of their goal, and secondarily, to minimise the cost of their choice, thereby giving rise to lexicographic preferences over goal-satisfaction and costs. Within this setting, where taxes operate on costs only, however, it may well happen that the elimination or introduction of equilibria can only be achieved at the cost of simultaneously introducing less desirable equilibria or eliminating more attractive ones. Although this framework has been studied extensively, the problem of precisely characterising the equilibria that may be induced or eliminated has remained open. In this paper we close this problem, giving a complete characterisation of those mechanisms that can induce a set of outcomes of the game to be exactly the set of Nash Equilibrium outcomes
Characterising the Manipulability of Boolean Games
The existence of (Nash) equilibria with undesirable properties is a well-known problem in game theory, which has motivated much research directed at the possibility of mechanisms for modifying games in order to eliminate undesirable equilibria, or induce desirable ones. Taxation schemes are a well-known mechanism for modifying games in this way. In the multi-agent systems community, taxation mechanisms for incentive engineering have been studied in the context of Boolean games with costs. These are games in which each player assigns truth-values to a set of propositional variables she uniquely controls in pursuit of satisfying an individual propositional goal formula; different choices for the player are also associated with different costs. In such a game, each player prefers primarily to see the satisfaction of their goal, and secondarily, to minimise the cost of their choice, thereby giving rise to lexicographic preferences over goal-satisfaction and costs. Within this setting, where taxes operate on costs only, however, it may well happen that the elimination or introduction of equilibria can only be achieved at the cost of simultaneously introducing less desirable equilibria or eliminating more attractive ones. Although this framework has been studied extensively, the problem of precisely characterising the equilibria that may be induced or eliminated has remained open. In this paper we close this problem, giving a complete characterisation of those mechanisms that can induce a set of outcomes of the game to be exactly the set of Nash Equilibrium outcomes
Adapting Quality Assurance to Adaptive Systems: The Scenario Coevolution Paradigm
From formal and practical analysis, we identify new challenges that
self-adaptive systems pose to the process of quality assurance. When tackling
these, the effort spent on various tasks in the process of software engineering
is naturally re-distributed. We claim that all steps related to testing need to
become self-adaptive to match the capabilities of the self-adaptive
system-under-test. Otherwise, the adaptive system's behavior might elude
traditional variants of quality assurance. We thus propose the paradigm of
scenario coevolution, which describes a pool of test cases and other
constraints on system behavior that evolves in parallel to the (in part
autonomous) development of behavior in the system-under-test. Scenario
coevolution offers a simple structure for the organization of adaptive testing
that allows for both human-controlled and autonomous intervention, supporting
software engineering for adaptive systems on a procedural as well as technical
level.Comment: 17 pages, published at ISOLA 201
The Power of Linear Programming for Valued CSPs
A class of valued constraint satisfaction problems (VCSPs) is characterised
by a valued constraint language, a fixed set of cost functions on a finite
domain. An instance of the problem is specified by a sum of cost functions from
the language with the goal to minimise the sum. This framework includes and
generalises well-studied constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs) and maximum
constraint satisfaction problems (Max-CSPs).
Our main result is a precise algebraic characterisation of valued constraint
languages whose instances can be solved exactly by the basic linear programming
relaxation. Using this result, we obtain tractability of several novel and
previously widely-open classes of VCSPs, including problems over valued
constraint languages that are: (1) submodular on arbitrary lattices; (2)
bisubmodular (also known as k-submodular) on arbitrary finite domains; (3)
weakly (and hence strongly) tree-submodular on arbitrary trees.Comment: Corrected a few typo
From the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm to a Quantum Alternating Operator Ansatz
The next few years will be exciting as prototype universal quantum processors
emerge, enabling implementation of a wider variety of algorithms. Of particular
interest are quantum heuristics, which require experimentation on quantum
hardware for their evaluation, and which have the potential to significantly
expand the breadth of quantum computing applications. A leading candidate is
Farhi et al.'s Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm, which alternates
between applying a cost-function-based Hamiltonian and a mixing Hamiltonian.
Here, we extend this framework to allow alternation between more general
families of operators. The essence of this extension, the Quantum Alternating
Operator Ansatz, is the consideration of general parametrized families of
unitaries rather than only those corresponding to the time-evolution under a
fixed local Hamiltonian for a time specified by the parameter. This ansatz
supports the representation of a larger, and potentially more useful, set of
states than the original formulation, with potential long-term impact on a
broad array of application areas. For cases that call for mixing only within a
desired subspace, refocusing on unitaries rather than Hamiltonians enables more
efficiently implementable mixers than was possible in the original framework.
Such mixers are particularly useful for optimization problems with hard
constraints that must always be satisfied, defining a feasible subspace, and
soft constraints whose violation we wish to minimize. More efficient
implementation enables earlier experimental exploration of an alternating
operator approach to a wide variety of approximate optimization, exact
optimization, and sampling problems. Here, we introduce the Quantum Alternating
Operator Ansatz, lay out design criteria for mixing operators, detail mappings
for eight problems, and provide brief descriptions of mappings for diverse
problems.Comment: 51 pages, 2 figures. Revised to match journal pape
- …