Computing Nash Equilibria in Non-Cooperative Games

Author(s):  
Alfredo Garro

Game Theory has recently drawn attention in new fields which go from algorithmic mechanism design to cybernetics. However, a fundamental problem to solve for effectively applying Game Theory in real word applications is the definition of well-founded solution concepts of a game and the design of efficient algorithms for their computation. A widely accepted solution concept for games in which any cooperation among the players must be self-enforcing (non-cooperative games) is represented by the Nash equilibrium. However, even in the two players case, the best algorithm known for computing Nash equilibria has an exponential worst-case running time; furthermore, if the computation of equilibria with simple additional properties is required, the problem becomes NP-hard. The paper aims to provide a solution for efficiently computing the Nash equilibria of a game as the result of the evolution of a system composed by interacting agents playing the game.

Author(s):  
Alfredo Garro

Game Theory (Von Neumann & Morgenstern, 1944) is a branch of applied mathematics and economics that studies situations (games) where self-interested interacting players act for maximizing their returns; therefore, the return of each player depends on his behaviour and on the behaviours of the other players. Game Theory, which plays an important role in the social and political sciences, has recently drawn attention in new academic fields which go from algorithmic mechanism design to cybernetics. However, a fundamental problem to solve for effectively applying Game Theory in real word applications is the definition of well-founded solution concepts of a game and the design of efficient algorithms for their computation. A widely accepted solution concept of a game in which any cooperation among the players must be selfenforcing (non-cooperative game) is represented by the Nash Equilibrium. In particular, a Nash Equilibrium is a set of strategies, one for each player of the game, such that no player can benefit by changing his strategy unilaterally, i.e. while the other players keep their strategies unchanged (Nash, 1951). The problem of computing Nash Equilibria in non-cooperative games is considered one of the most important open problem in Complexity Theory (Papadimitriou, 2001). Daskalakis, Goldbergy, and Papadimitriou (2005), showed that the problem of computing a Nash equilibrium in a game with four or more players is complete for the complexity class PPAD-Polynomial Parity Argument Directed version (Papadimitriou, 1991), moreover, Chen and Deng extended this result for 2-player games (Chen & Deng, 2005). However, even in the two players case, the best algorithm known has an exponential worst-case running time (Savani & von Stengel, 2004); furthermore, if the computation of equilibria with simple additional properties is required, the problem immediately becomes NP-hard (Bonifaci, Di Iorio, & Laura, 2005) (Conitzer & Sandholm, 2003) (Gilboa & Zemel, 1989) (Gottlob, Greco, & Scarcello, 2003). Motivated by these results, recent studies have dealt with the problem of efficiently computing Nash Equilibria by exploiting approaches based on the concepts of learning and evolution (Fudenberg & Levine, 1998) (Maynard Smith, 1982). In these approaches the Nash Equilibria of a game are not statically computed but are the result of the evolution of a system composed by agents playing the game. In particular, each agent after different rounds will learn to play a strategy that, under the hypothesis of agent’s rationality, will be one of the Nash equilibria of the game (Benaim & Hirsch, 1999) (Carmel & Markovitch, 1996). This article presents SALENE, a Multi-Agent System (MAS) for learning Nash Equilibria in noncooperative games, which is based on the above mentioned concepts.


Entropy ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (10) ◽  
pp. 782 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christos Papadimitriou ◽  
Georgios Piliouras

In 1950, Nash proposed a natural equilibrium solution concept for games hence called Nash equilibrium, and proved that all finite games have at least one. The proof is through a simple yet ingenious application of Brouwer’s (or, in another version Kakutani’s) fixed point theorem, the most sophisticated result in his era’s topology—in fact, recent algorithmic work has established that Nash equilibria are computationally equivalent to fixed points. In this paper, we propose a new class of universal non-equilibrium solution concepts arising from an important theorem in the topology of dynamical systems that was unavailable to Nash. This approach starts with both a game and a learning dynamics, defined over mixed strategies. The Nash equilibria are fixpoints of the dynamics, but the system behavior is captured by an object far more general than the Nash equilibrium that is known in dynamical systems theory as chain recurrent set. Informally, once we focus on this solution concept—this notion of “the outcome of the game”—every game behaves like a potential game with the dynamics converging to these states. In other words, unlike Nash equilibria, this solution concept is algorithmic in the sense that it has a constructive proof of existence. We characterize this solution for simple benchmark games under replicator dynamics, arguably the best known evolutionary dynamics in game theory. For (weighted) potential games, the new concept coincides with the fixpoints/equilibria of the dynamics. However, in (variants of) zero-sum games with fully mixed (i.e., interior) Nash equilibria, it covers the whole state space, as the dynamics satisfy specific information theoretic constants of motion. We discuss numerous novel computational, as well as structural, combinatorial questions raised by this chain recurrence conception of games.


2006 ◽  
Vol 08 (01) ◽  
pp. 33-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARCO MARGIOCCO ◽  
LUCIA PUSILLO

The aim of this paper is to discuss a new concept of well-posedness for non cooperative games. Starting from the definition of (∊,k) equilibrium as the point where every player either guarantees at least k or he (she) does not lose more than ∊, we introduce an original definition of well-posedness. We study characterizations of this well-posedness and its relations with the more known Tikhonov well-posedness. We prove that this well-posedness is an ordinal property if the payoff functions are bounded from below.


2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (02) ◽  
pp. 1540015 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. E. S. Raghavan

Mathematical foundations of conflict resolutions are deeply rooted in the theory of cooperative and non-cooperative games. While many elementary models of conflicts are formalized, one often raises the question whether game theory and its mathematically developed tools are applicable to actual legal disputes in practice. We choose an example from union management conflict on hourly wage dispute and how zero sum two person game theory can be used by a judge to bring about the need for realistic compromises between the two parties. We choose another example from the 2000-year old Babylonian Talmud to describe how a certain debt problem was resolved. While they may be unaware of cooperative game theory, their solution methods are fully consistent with the solution concept called the nucleolus of a TU game.


2004 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ferenc Forgó

The paper gives a brief account of von Neumann's contribution to the foundation of game theory: definition of abstract games, the minimax theorem for two-person zero-sum games and the stable set solution for cooperative games with side payments. The presentation is self-contained, uses very little mathematical formalism and caters to the nonspecialist. Basic concepts and their implications are in focus. It is also indicated how von Neumann's groundbreaking work initiated further research, and a few unsolved problems are also mentioned.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-382
Author(s):  
Vivienne Brown

AbstractThis paper proposes a new interpretation of non-cooperative games that shows why the unilateralism of best-reply reasoning fails to capture the mutuality of strategic interdependence. Drawing on an intersubjective approach to theorizing individual agency in shared context, including a non-individualistic model of common belief without infinite regress, the paper develops a general model of a 2 × 2 simultaneous one-shot non-cooperative game and applies it to games including Hi-Lo, Stag Hunt, Prisoners’ Dilemma, Chicken, BoS and Matching Pennies. Results include High as the rational choice in Hi-Lo, and Cooperate as a possible rational choice in the Prisoners’ Dilemma.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document