Equilibria-based Probabilistic Model Checking for Concurrent Stochastic Games

Probabilistic model checking for stochastic games enables formal verification of systems that comprise competing or collaborating entities operating in a stochastic environment. Despite good progress in the area, existing approaches focus on zero-sum goals and cannot reason about scenarios where entities are endowed with different objectives. In this paper, we propose probabilistic model checking techniques for concurrent stochastic games based on Nash equilibria. We extend the temporal logic rPATL (probabilistic alternating-time temporal logic with rewards) to allow reasoning about players with distinct quantitative goals, which capture either the probability of an event occurring or a reward measure. We present algorithms to synthesise strategies that are subgame perfect social welfare optimal Nash equilibria, i.e., where there is no incentive for any players to unilaterally change their strategy in any state of the game, whilst the combined probabilities or rewards are maximised. We implement our techniques in the PRISM-games tool and apply them to several case studies, including network protocols and robot navigation, showing the benefits compared to existing approaches

Computer-aided verification in mechanism design

In mechanism design, the gold standard solution concepts are dominant strategy incentive compatibility and Bayesian incentive compatibility. These solution concepts relieve the (possibly unsophisticated) bidders from the need to engage in complicated strategizing. While incentive properties are simple to state, their proofs are specific to the mechanism and can be quite complex. This raises two concerns. From a practical perspective, checking a complex proof can be a tedious process, often requiring experts knowledgeable in mechanism design. Furthermore, from a modeling perspective, if unsophisticated agents are unconvinced of incentive properties, they may strategize in unpredictable ways. To address both concerns, we explore techniques from computer-aided verification to construct formal proofs of incentive properties. Because formal proofs can be automatically checked, agents do not need to manually check the properties, or even understand the proof. To demonstrate, we present the verification of a sophisticated mechanism: the generic reduction from Bayesian incentive compatible mechanism design to algorithm design given by Hartline, Kleinberg, and Malekian. This mechanism presents new challenges for formal verification, including essential use of randomness from both the execution of the mechanism and from the prior type distributions. As an immediate consequence, our work also formalizes Bayesian incentive compatibility for the entire family of mechanisms derived via this reduction. Finally, as an intermediate step in our formalization, we provide the first formal verification of incentive compatibility for the celebrated Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism

A Probabilistic Approach to Mean Field Games with Major and Minor Players

We propose a new approach to mean field games with major and minor players. Our formulation involves a two player game where the optimization of the representative minor player is standard while the major player faces an optimization over conditional McKean-Vlasov stochastic differential equations. The definition of this limiting game is justified by proving that its solution provides approximate Nash equilibriums for large finite player games. This proof depends upon the generalization of standard results on the propagation of chaos to conditional dynamics. Because it is on independent interest, we prove this generalization in full detail. Using a conditional form of the Pontryagin stochastic maximum principle (proven in the appendix), we reduce the solution of the mean field game to a forward-backward system of stochastic differential equations of the conditional McKean-Vlasov type, which we solve in the Linear Quadratic setting. We use this class of models to show that Nash equilibriums in our formulation can be different from those of the formulations contemplated so far in the literature

Automatic Verification of Concurrent Stochastic Systems

Automated verification techniques for stochastic games allow formal reasoning about systems that feature competitive or collaborative behaviour among rational agents in uncertain or probabilistic settings. Existing tools and techniques focus on turn-based games, where each state of the game is controlled by a single player, and on zero-sum properties, where two players or coalitions have directly opposing objectives. In this paper, we present automated verification techniques for concurrent stochastic games (CSGs), which provide a more natural model of concurrent decision making and interaction. We also consider (social welfare) Nash equilibria, to formally identify scenarios where two players or coalitions with distinct goals can collaborate to optimise their joint performance. We propose an extension of the temporal logic rPATL for specifying quantitative properties in this setting and present corresponding algorithms for verification and strategy synthesis for a variant of stopping games. For finite-horizon properties the computation is exact, while for infinite-horizon it is approximate using value iteration. For zero-sum properties it requires solving matrix games via linear programming, and for equilibria-based properties we find social welfare or social cost Nash equilibria of bimatrix games via the method of labelled polytopes through an SMT encoding. We implement this approach in PRISM-games, which required extending the tool's modelling language for CSGs, and apply it to case studies from domains including robotics, computer security and computer networks, explicitly demonstrating the benefits of both CSGs and equilibria-based properties

Equilibria-based probabilistic model checking for concurrent stochastic games

Probabilistic model checking for stochastic games enables formal verification of systems that comprise competing or collaborating entities operating in a stochastic environment. Despite good progress in the area, existing approaches focus on zero-sum goals and cannot reason about scenarios where entities are endowed with different objectives. In this paper, we propose probabilistic model checking techniques for concurrent stochastic games based on Nash equilibria. We extend the temporal logic rPATL (probabilistic alternating-time temporal logic with rewards) to allow reasoning about players with distinct quantitative goals, which capture either the probability of an event occurring or a reward measure. We present algorithms to synthesise strategies that are subgame perfect social welfare optimal Nash equilibria, i.e., where there is no incentive for any players to unilaterally change their strategy in any state of the game, whilst the combined probabilities or rewards are maximised. We implement our techniques in the PRISM-games tool and apply them to several case studies, including network protocols and robot navigation, showing the benefits compared to existing approaches

Automated verification of concurrent stochastic games

We present automatic verifcation techniques for concurrent stochastic multi-player games (CSGs) with rewards. To express properties of such models, we adapt the temporal logic rPATL (probabilistic alternating-time temporal logic with rewards), originally introduced for the simpler model of turn-based games, which enables quantitative reasoning about the ability of coalitions of players to achieve goals related to the probability of an event or reward measures. We propose and implement a modelling approach and model checking algorithms for property verifcation and strategy synthesis of CSGs, as an extension of PRISMgames. We evaluate the performance, scalability and applicability of our techniques on case studies from domains such as security, networks and finance, showing that we can analyse systems with probabilistic, cooperative and competitive behaviour between concurrent components, including many scenarios that cannot be analysed with turn-based models

Collusion in Peer-to-Peer Systems

Peer-to-peer systems have reached a widespread use, ranging from academic and industrial applications to home entertainment. The key advantage of this paradigm lies in its scalability and flexibility, consequences of the participants sharing their resources for the common welfare. Security in such systems is a desirable goal. For example, when mission-critical operations or bank transactions are involved, their effectiveness strongly depends on the perception that users have about the system dependability and trustworthiness. A major threat to the security of these systems is the phenomenon of collusion. Peers can be selfish colluders, when they try to fool the system to gain unfair advantages over other peers, or malicious, when their purpose is to subvert the system or disturb other users. The problem, however, has received so far only a marginal attention by the research community. While several solutions exist to counter attacks in peer-to-peer systems, very few of them are meant to directly counter colluders and their attacks. Reputation, micro-payments, and concepts of game theory are currently used as the main means to obtain fairness in the usage of the resources. Our goal is to provide an overview of the topic by examining the key issues involved. We measure the relevance of the problem in the current literature and the effectiveness of existing philosophies against it, to suggest fruitful directions in the further development of the field