Quasi-Perfect Stackelberg Equilibrium

Equilibrium refinements are important in extensive-form (i.e., tree-form) games, where they amend weaknesses of the Nash equilibrium concept by requiring sequential rationality and other beneficial properties. One of the most attractive refinement concepts is quasi-perfect equilibrium. While quasi-perfection has been studied in extensive-form games, it is poorly understood in Stackelberg settings---that is, settings where a leader can commit to a strategy---which are important for modeling, for example, security games. In this paper, we introduce the axiomatic definition of quasi-perfect Stackelberg equilibrium. We develop a broad class of game perturbation schemes that lead to them in the limit. Our class of perturbation schemes strictly generalizes prior perturbation schemes introduced for the computation of (non-Stackelberg) quasi-perfect equilibria. Based on our perturbation schemes, we develop a branch-and-bound algorithm for computing a quasi-perfect Stackelberg equilibrium. It leverages a perturbed variant of the linear program for computing a Stackelberg extensive-form correlated equilibrium. Experiments show that our algorithm can be used to find an approximate quasi-perfect Stackelberg equilibrium in games with thousands of nodes

Robust Stackelberg Equilibria in Extensive-Form Games and Extension to Limited Lookahead

Stackelberg equilibria have become increasingly important as a solution concept in computational game theory, largely inspired by practical problems such as security settings. In practice, however, there is typically uncertainty regarding the model about the opponent. This paper is, to our knowledge, the first to investigate Stackelberg equilibria under uncertainty in extensive-form games, one of the broadest classes of game. We introduce robust Stackelberg equilibria, where the uncertainty is about the opponent's payoffs, as well as ones where the opponent has limited lookahead and the uncertainty is about the opponent's node evaluation function. We develop a new mixed-integer program for the deterministic limited-lookahead setting. We then extend the program to the robust setting for Stackelberg equilibrium under unlimited and under limited lookahead by the opponent. We show that for the specific case of interval uncertainty about the opponent's payoffs (or about the opponent's node evaluations in the case of limited lookahead), robust Stackelberg equilibria can be computed with a mixed-integer program that is of the same asymptotic size as that for the deterministic setting.Comment: Published at AAAI1

Equilibria in Sequential Allocation

Sequential allocation is a simple mechanism for sharing multiple indivisible items. We study strategic behavior in sequential allocation. In particular, we consider Nash dynamics, as well as the computation and Pareto optimality of pure equilibria, and Stackelberg strategies. We first demonstrate that, even for two agents, better responses can cycle. We then present a linear-time algorithm that returns a profile (which we call the "bluff profile") that is in pure Nash equilibrium. Interestingly, the outcome of the bluff profile is the same as that of the truthful profile and the profile is in pure Nash equilibrium for \emph{all} cardinal utilities consistent with the ordinal preferences. We show that the outcome of the bluff profile is Pareto optimal with respect to pairwise comparisons. In contrast, we show that an assignment may not be Pareto optimal with respect to pairwise comparisons even if it is a result of a preference profile that is in pure Nash equilibrium for all utilities consistent with ordinal preferences. Finally, we present a dynamic program to compute an optimal Stackelberg strategy for two agents, where the second agent has a constant number of distinct values for the items

Leadership in Singleton Congestion Games: What is Hard and What is Easy

We study the problem of computing Stackelberg equilibria Stackelberg games whose underlying structure is in congestion games, focusing on the case where each player can choose a single resource (a.k.a. singleton congestion games) and one of them acts as leader. In particular, we address the cases where the players either have the same action spaces (i.e., the set of resources they can choose is the same for all of them) or different ones, and where their costs are either monotonic functions of the resource congestion or not. We show that, in the case where the players have different action spaces, the cost the leader incurs in a Stackelberg equilibrium cannot be approximated in polynomial time up to within any polynomial factor in the size of the game unless P = NP, independently of the cost functions being monotonic or not. We show that a similar result also holds when the players have nonmonotonic cost functions, even if their action spaces are the same. Differently, we prove that the case with identical action spaces and monotonic cost functions is easy, and propose polynomial-time algorithm for it. We also improve an algorithm for the computation of a socially optimal equilibrium in singleton congestion games with the same action spaces without leadership, and extend it to the computation of a Stackelberg equilibrium for the case where the leader is restricted to pure strategies. For the cases in which the problem of finding an equilibrium is hard, we show how, in the optimistic setting where the followers break ties in favor of the leader, the problem can be formulated via mixed-integer linear programming techniques, which computational experiments show to scale quite well

Computation of Stackelberg Equilibria of Finite Sequential Games

The Stackelberg equilibrium solution concept describes optimal strategies to commit to: Player 1 (termed the leader) publicly commits to a strategy and Player 2 (termed the follower) plays a best response to this strategy (ties are broken in favor of the leader). We study Stackelberg equilibria in finite sequential games (or extensive-form games) and provide new exact algorithms, approximate algorithms, and hardness results for several classes of these sequential games

Efficient Stackelberg Strategies for Finitely Repeated Games

We study the problem of efficiently computing optimal strategies in asymmetric leader-follower games repeated a finite number of times, which presents a different set of technical challenges than the infinite-horizon setting. More precisely, we give efficient algorithms for finding approximate Stackelberg equilibria in finite-horizon repeated two-player games, along with rates of convergence depending on the horizon $T$. We give two algorithms, one computing strategies with an optimal $\frac{1}{T}$ rate at the expense of an exponential dependence on the number of actions, and another (randomized) approach computing strategies with no dependence on the number of actions but a worse dependence on $T$ of $\frac{1}{T^{0.25}}$. Both algorithms build upon a linear program to produce simple automata leader strategies and induce corresponding automata best-responses for the follower. We complement these results by showing that approximating the Stackelberg value in three-player finite-horizon repeated games is a computationally hard problem via a reduction from the balanced vertex cover problem.Comment: An earlier version of this paper used incorrect asymptotic notation in the statement of the main hardness result as well as in the description of related hardness results in a table (in the related work section). The proofs and implication of the result remain unchanged, but a correction has been made to the statement of the resul

An "informationally robust equilibrium" for two-person nonzero-sum games

Game Theory;Equilibrium Theory

Game theory on the blockchain: a model for games with smart contracts

We propose a model for games in which the players have shared access to a blockchain that allows them to deploy smart contracts to act on their behalf. This changes fundamental game-theoretic assumptions about rationality since a contract can commit a player to act irrationally in specific subgames, making credible otherwise non-credible threats. This is further complicated by considering the interaction between multiple contracts which can reason about each other. This changes the nature of the game in a nontrivial way as choosing which contract to play can itself be considered a move in the game. Our model generalizes known notions of equilibria, with a single contract being equivalent to a Stackelberg equilibrium, and two contracts being equivalent to a reverse Stackelberg equilibrium. We prove a number of bounds on the complexity of computing SPE in such games with smart contracts. We show that computing an SPE is $\textsf{PSPACE}$-hard in the general case. Specifically, in games with $k$ contracts, we show that computing an SPE is $\Sigma_k^\textsf{P}$-hard for games of imperfect information. We show that computing an SPE remains $\textsf{PSPACE}$-hard in games of perfect information if we allow for an unbounded number of contracts. We give an algorithm for computing an SPE in two-contract games of perfect information that runs in time $O(m\ell)$ where $m$ is the size of the game tree and $\ell$ is the number of terminal nodes. Finally, we conjecture the problem to be $\textsf{NP}$-complete for three contracts