We study the equilibrium computation problem for two classical resource allocation games: atomic splittable congestion games and multimarket Cournot oligopolies. For atomic splittable congestion games with singleton strategies and player-specific affine cost functions, we devise the first polynomial time algorithm computing a pure Nash equilibrium. Our algorithm is combinatorial and computes the exact equilibrium assuming rational input. The idea is to compute an equilibrium for an associated integrally-splittable singleton congestion game in which the players can only split their demands in integral multiples of a common packet size. While integral games have been considered in the literature before, no polynomial time algorithm computing an equilibrium was known. Also for this class, we devise the first polynomial time algorithm and use it as a building block for our main algorithm. We then develop a polynomial time computable transformation mapping a multimarket Cournot competition game with firm-specific affine price functions and quadratic costs to an associated atomic splittable congestion game as described above. The transformation preserves equilibria in either games and, thus, leads -- via our first algorithm -- to a polynomial time algorithm computing Cournot equilibria. Finally, our analysis for integrally-splittable games implies new bounds on the difference between real and integral Cournot equilibria. The bounds can be seen as a generalization of the recent bounds for single market oligopolies obtained by Todd [2016].
Atomic Splittable Congestion Games. Atomic splittable network congestion games with player-independent cost functions have been studied (seemingly independent) by @cite_15 and Haurie and Marcotte @cite_13 and Marcotte @cite_30 . Both lines of research mentioned that Rosens' existence result for concave games on compact strategy spaces implies the existence of pure Nash equilibria via Kakutani's fixed-point theorem. @cite_38 presented the first upper bounds on the price of anarchy in atomic splittable congestion games. These were later improved by Harks @cite_43 and finally shown to be tight by Schoppmann and Roughgarden @cite_47 .
@cite_30 @cite_38 @cite_47 @cite_43 @cite_15 @cite_13
2070394877 1517645949 2143381018 2148042342 2133243407 2019543382 2072113937 2108444537 1548210998 1554620983 2032349632 2051206974 2021677593 2145297839 2759949687 2076641899 2074104906 1978317291 1498355005 2007583146
We resolve the worst-case price of anarchy (POA) of atomic splittable congestion games. Prior to this work, no tight bounds on the POA in such games were known, even for the simplest non-trivial special case of affine cost functions. We make two distinct contributions. On the upper-bound side, we define the framework of "local smoothness", which refines the standard smoothness framework for games with convex strategy sets. While standard smoothness arguments cannot establish tight bounds on the POA in atomic splittable congestion games, we prove that local smoothness arguments can. Further, we prove that every POA bound derived via local smoothness applies automatically to every correlated equilibrium of the game. Unlike standard smoothness arguments, bounds proved using local smoothness do not always apply to the coarse correlated equilibria of the game. Our second contribution is a very general lower bound: for every set L that satisfies mild technical conditions, the worst-case POA of pure Nash equilibria in atomic splittable congestion games with cost functions in L is exactly the smallest upper bound provable using local smoothness arguments. In particular, the worst-case POA of pure Nash equilibria, mixed Nash equilibria, and correlated equilibria coincide in such games. We study the outcome of natural learning algorithms in atomic congestion games. Atomic congestion games have a wide variety of equilibria often with vastly differing social costs. We show that in almost all such games, the well- known multiplicative-weights learning algorithm results in convergence to pure equilibria. Our results show that nat- ural learning behavior can avoid bad outcomes predicted by the price of anarchy in atomic congestion games such as the load-balancing game introduced by Koutsoupias and Pa- padimitriou, which has super-constant price of anarchy and has correlated equilibria that are exponentially worse than any mixed Nash equilibrium. Our results identify a set of mixed Nash equilibria that we call weakly stable equilibria. Our notion of weakly stable is defined game-theoretically, but we show that this property holds whenever a stability criterion from the theory of dy- namical systems is satisfied. This allows us to show that in every congestion game, the distribution of play converges to the set of weakly stable equilibria. Pure Nash equilibria are weakly stable, and we show using techniques from algebraic geometry that the converse is true with probability 1 when congestion costs are selected at random independently on each edge (from any monotonically parametrized distribu- tion). We further extend our results to show that players can use algorithms with different (sufficiently small) learn- ing rates, i.e. they can trade off convergence speed and long term average regret differently. We characterize the price of anarchy in weighted congestion games, as a function of the allowable resource cost functions. Our results provide as thorough an understanding of this quantity as is already known for nonatomic and unweighted congestion games, and take the form of universal (cost function-independent) worst-case examples. One noteworthy byproduct of our proofs is the fact that weighted congestion games are "tight", which implies that the worst-case price of anarchy with respect to pure Nash, mixed Nash, correlated, and coarse correlated equilibria are always equal (under mild conditions on the allowable cost functions). Another is the fact that, like nonatomic but unlike atomic (unweighted) congestion games, weighted congestion games with trivial structure already realize the worst-case POA, at least for polynomial cost functions. We also prove a new result about unweighted congestion games: the worst-case price of anarchy in symmetric games is, as the number of players goes to infinity, as large as in their more general asymmetric counterparts. Congestion games are multi-player games in which players' costs are additive over a set of resources that have anonymous cost functions, with pure strategies corresponding to certain subsets of resources. In a splittable congestion game, each player can choose a convex combination of subsets of resources. We characterize the worst-case price of anarchy — a quantitative measure of the inefficiency of equilibria — in splittable congestion games. Our approximation guarantee is parameterized by the set of allowable resource cost functions, and degrades with the “degree of nonlinearity” of these cost functions. We prove that our guarantee is the best possible for every set of cost functions that satisfies mild technical conditions. We prove our guarantee using a novel “local smoothness” proof framework, and as a consequence the guarantee applies not only to the Nash equilibria of splittable congestion games, but also to all correlated equilibria. The price of anarchy (POA) is a worst-case measure of the inefficiency of selfish behavior, defined as the ratio of the objective function value of a worst Nash equilibrium of a game and that of an optimal outcome. This measure implicitly assumes that players successfully reach some Nash equilibrium. This drawback motivates the search for inefficiency bounds that apply more generally to weaker notions of equilibria, such as mixed Nash and correlated equilibria; or to sequences of outcomes generated by natural experimentation strategies, such as successive best responses or simultaneous regret-minimization. We prove a general and fundamental connection between the price of anarchy and its seemingly stronger relatives in classes of games with a sum objective. First, we identify a "canonical sufficient condition" for an upper bound of the POA for pure Nash equilibria, which we call a smoothness argument. Second, we show that every bound derived via a smoothness argument extends automatically, with no quantitative degradation in the bound, to mixed Nash equilibria, correlated equilibria, and the average objective function value of regret-minimizing players (or "price of total anarchy"). Smoothness arguments also have automatic implications for the inefficiency of approximate and Bayesian-Nash equilibria and, under mild additional assumptions, for bicriteria bounds and for polynomial-length best-response sequences. We also identify classes of games --- most notably, congestion games with cost functions restricted to an arbitrary fixed set --- that are tight, in the sense that smoothness arguments are guaranteed to produce an optimal worst-case upper bound on the POA, even for the smallest set of interest (pure Nash equilibria). Byproducts of our proof of this result include the first tight bounds on the POA in congestion games with non-polynomial cost functions, and the first structural characterization of atomic congestion games that are universal worst-case examples for the POA. We characterize the Price of Anarchy (POA) in weighted congestion games, as a function of the allowable resource cost functions. Our results provide as thorough an understanding of this quantity as is already known for nonatomic and unweighted congestion games, and take the form of universal (cost function-independent) worst-case examples. One noteworthy by-product of our proofs is the fact that weighted congestion games are “tight,” which implies that the worst-case price of anarchy with respect to pure Nash equilibria, mixed Nash equilibria, correlated equilibria, and coarse correlated equilibria are always equal (under mild conditions on the allowable cost functions). Another is the fact that, like nonatomic but unlike atomic (unweighted) congestion games, weighted congestion games with trivial structure already realize the worst-case POA, at least for polynomial cost functions. We also prove a new result about unweighted congestion games: the worst-case price of anarchy in symmetric games is as large as in their more general asymmetric counterparts. In the traffic assignment problem, first proposed by Wardrop in 1952, commuters select the shortest available path to travel from their origins to their destinations. We study a generalization of this problem in which competitors, who may control a nonnegligible fraction of the total flow, ship goods across a network. This type of games, usually referred to as atomic games, readily applies to situations in which the competing freight companies have market power. Other applications include intelligent transportation systems, competition among telecommunication network service providers, and scheduling with flexible machines. Our goal is to determine to what extent these systems can benefit from some form of coordination or regulation. We measure the quality of the outcome of the game without centralized control by computing the worst-case inefficiency of Nash equilibria. The main conclusion is that although self-interested competitors will not achieve a fully efficient solution from the system's point of view, the loss is not too severe. We show how to compute several bounds for the worst-case inefficiency that depend on the characteristics of cost functions and on the market structure in the game. In addition, building upon the work of Catoni and Pallotino, we show examples in which market aggregation (or collusion) adversely impacts the aggregated competitors, even though their market power increases. For example, Nash equilibria of atomic network games may be less efficient than the corresponding Wardrop equilibria. When competitors are completely symmetric, we provide a characterization of the Nash equilibrium using a potential function, and prove that this counterintuitive phenomenon does not arise. Finally, we study a pricing mechanism that elicits more coordination from the players by reducing the worst-case inefficiency of Nash equilibria. We consider structural and algorithmic questions related to the Nash dynamics of weighted congestion games. In weighted congestion games with linear latency functions, the existence of pure Nash equilibria is guaranteed by a potential function argument. Unfortunately, this proof of existence is inefficient and computing pure Nash equilibria in such games is a PLS-hard problem even when all players have unit weights. The situation gets worse when superlinear (e.g., quadratic) latency functions come into play; in this case, the Nash dynamics of the game may contain cycles and pure Nash equilibria may not even exist. Given these obstacles, we consider approximate pure Nash equilibria as alternative solution concepts. A ρ--approximate pure Nash equilibrium is a state of a (weighted congestion) game from which no player has any incentive to deviate in order to improve her cost by a multiplicative factor higher than ρ. Do such equilibria exist for small values of ρ? And if so, can we compute them efficiently? We provide positive answers to both questions for weighted congestion games with polynomial latency functions by exploiting an “approximation” of such games by a new class of potential games that we call Ψ-games. This allows us to show that these games have d!-approximate pure Nash equilibria, where d is the maximum degree of the latency functions. Our main technical contribution is an efficient algorithm for computing O(1)-approximate pure Nash equilibria when d is a constant. For games with linear latency functions, the approximation guarantee is 3+√5 2 + Oγ for arbitrarily small γ > 0; for latency functions with maximum degree d≥ 2, it is d2d+o(d). The running time is polynomial in the number of bits in the representation of the game and 1 γ. As a byproduct of our techniques, we also show the following interesting structural statement for weighted congestion games with polynomial latency functions of maximum degree d ≥ 2: polynomially-long sequences of best-response moves from any initial state to a dO(d2)-approximate pure Nash equilibrium exist and can be efficiently identified in such games as long as d is a constant. To the best of our knowledge, these are the first positive algorithmic results for approximate pure Nash equilibria in weighted congestion games. Our techniques significantly extend our recent work on unweighted congestion games through the use of Ψ-games. The concept of approximating nonpotential games by potential ones is interesting in itself and might have further applications. We study bottleneck congestion games where the social cost is determined by the worst congestion on any resource. In the literature, bottleneck games assume player utility costs determined by the worst congested resource in their strategy. However, the Nash equilibria of such games are inefficient since the price of anarchy can be very high and proportional to the number of resources. In order to obtain smaller price of anarchy we introduce exponential bottleneck games, where the utility costs of the players are exponential functions of their congestions. In particular, the delay function for any resource r is MCr, where Cr denotes the number of players that use r, and M is an integer constant. We find that exponential bottleneck games are very efficient and give the following bound on the price of anarchy: O(log |R|), where R is the set of resources. This price of anarchy is tight, since we demonstrate a game with price of anarchy Ω(log |R|). We obtain our tight bounds by using two novel proof techniques: transformation, which we use to convert arbitrary games to simpler games, and expansion, which we use to bound the price of anarchy in a simpler game. We present a short geometric proof for the price of anarchy results that have recently been established in a series of papers on selfish routing in multicommodity flow networks. This novel proof also facilitates two new types of results: On the one hand, we give pseudo-approximation results that depend on the class of allowable cost functions. On the other hand, we derive improved bounds on the inefficiency of Nash equilibria for situations in which the equilibrium travel times are within reasonable limits of the free-flow travel times. These tighter bounds help to explain empirical observations in vehicular traffic networks. Our analysis holds in the more general context of congestion games, which provides the framework in which we describe this work. We study a network creation game recently proposed by Fabrikant, Luthra, Maneva, Papadimitriou and Shenker. In this game, each player (vertex) can create links (edges) to other players at a cost of α per edge. The goal of every player is to minimize the sum consisting of (a) the cost of the links he has created and (b) the sum of the distances to all other players. conjectured that there exists a constant A such that, for any α > A, all non-transient Nash equilibria graphs are trees. They showed that if a Nash equilibrium is a tree, the price of anarchy is constant. In this paper we disprove the tree conjecture. More precisely, we show that for any positive integer n 0 , there exists a graph built by n ≥ n 0 players which contains cycles and forms a non-transient Nash equilibrium, for any α with 1 < α ≤ √n 2. Our construction makes use of some interesting results on finite affine planes. On the other hand we show that, for α ≥ 12n[log n], every Nash equilibrium forms a tree.Without relying on the tree conjecture, proved an upper bound on the price of anarchy of O(√α), where α ∈ [2, n2]. We improve this bound. Specifically, we derive a constant upper bound for α ∈ O(√n) and for α ≥ 12n[log n]. For the intermediate values we derive an improved bound of O(1 + (min α2 n, n2 α )1 3).Additionally, we develop characterizations of Nash equilibria and extend our results to a weighted network creation game as well as to scenarios with cost sharing. The complexity of computing pure Nash equilibria in congestion games was recently shown to be PLS-complete. In this paper, we therefore study the complexity of computing approximate equilibria in congestion games. An alpha-approximate equilibrium, for α > 1, is a state of the game in which none of the players can make an α-greedy step, i.e., an unilateral strategy change that decreases the player's cost by a factor of at least α. Our main result shows that finding an α-approximate equilibrium of a given congestion game is sc PLS-complete, for any polynomial-time computable α > 1. Our analysis is based on a gap introducing PLS-reduction from FLIP, i.e., the problem of finding a local optimum of a function encoded by an arbitrary circuit. As this reduction is tight it additionally implies that computing an α-approximate equilibrium reachable from a given initial state by a sequence of α-greedy steps is PSPACE-complete. Our results are in sharp contrast to a recent result showing that every local search problem in PLS admits a fully polynomial time approximation scheme. In addition, we show that there exist congestion games with states such that any sequence of α-greedy steps leading from one of these states to an α-approximate Nash equilibrium has exponential length, even if the delay functions satisfy a bounded-jump condition. This result shows that a recent result about polynomial time convergence for α-greedy steps in congestion games satisfying the bounded-jump condition is restricted to symmetric games only. We consider the price of anarchy of pure Nash equilibria in congestion games with linear latency functions. For asymmetric games, the price of anarchy of maximum social cost is Θ(√N), where N is the number of players. For all other cases of symmetric or asymmetric games and for both maximum and average social cost, the price of anarchy is 5 2. We extend the results to latency functions that are polynomials of bounded degree. We also extend some of the results to mixed Nash equilibria. We investigate from the computational viewpoint multi-player games that are guaranteed to have pure Nash equilibria. We focus on congestion games, and show that a pure Nash equilibrium can be computed in polynomial time in the symmetric network case, while the problem is PLS-complete in general. We discuss implications to non-atomic congestion games, and we explore the scope of the potential function method for proving existence of pure Nash equilibria. Bottleneck congestion games properly model the properties of many real-world network routing applications. They are known to possess strong equilibria—a strengthening of Nash equilibrium to resilience against coalitional deviations. In this paper, we study the computational complexity of pure Nash and strong equilibria in these games. We provide a generic centralized algorithm to compute strong equilibria, which has polynomial running time for many interesting classes of games such as, e.g., matroid or single-commodity bottleneck congestion games. In addition, we examine the more demanding goal to reach equilibria in polynomial time using natural improvement dynamics. Using unilateral improvement dynamics in matroid games pure Nash equilibria can be reached efficiently. In contrast, computing even a single coalitional improvement move in matroid and single-commodity games is strongly NP-hard. In addition, we establish a variety of hardness results and lower bounds regarding the duration of unilateral and coalitional improvement dynamics. They continue to hold even for convergence to approximate equilibria. Abstract 6 introduced the class of congestion games and proved that they always possess a Nash equilibrium in pure strategies. Here we obtain conditions for the existence of a strong equilibrium in this class of games, as well as for the equivalence of Nash and strong equilibria. We also give conditions for uniqueness and for Pareto optimality of the Nash equilibrium. Except for a natural monotonicity assumption on the utilities, the conditions are expressed only in terms of the underlying congestion game form. It turns out that avoiding a certain type of bad configuration in the strategy spaces is essential to positive results. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: C71, C72, D62. We study the speed of convergence of decentralized dynamics to approximately optimal solutions in potential games. We consider α-Nash dynamics in which a player makes a move if the improvement in his payoff is more than an α factor of his own payoff. Despite the known polynomial convergence of α-Nash dynamics to approximate Nash equilibria in symmetric congestion games [7], it has been shown that the convergence time to approximate Nash equilibria in asymmetric congestion games is exponential [25]. In contrast to this negative result, and as the main result of this paper, we show that for asymmetric congestion games with linear and polynomial delay functions, the convergence time of α-Nash dynamics to an approximate optimal solution is polynomial in the number of players, with approximation ratio that is arbitrarily close to the price of anarchy of the game. In particular, we show this polynomial convergence under the minimal liveness assumption that each player gets at least one chance to move in every T steps. We also prove that the same polynomial convergence result does not hold for (exact) best-response dynamics, showing the α-Nash dynamics is required. We extend these results for congestion games to other potential games including weighted congestion games with linear delay functions, cut games (also called party affiliation games) and market sharing games. We study the impact of combinatorial structure in congestion games on the complexity of computing pure Nash equilibria and the convergence time of best response sequences. In particular, we investigate which properties of the strategy spaces of individual players ensure a polynomial convergence time. We show that if the strategy space of each player consists of the bases of a matroid over the set of resources, then the lengths of all best response sequences are polynomially bounded in the number of players and resources. We also prove that this result is tight, that is, the matroid property is a necessary and sufficient condition on the players' strategy spaces for guaranteeing polynomial-time convergence to a Nash equilibrium. In addition, we present an approach that enables us to devise hardness proofs for various kinds of combinatorial games, including first results about the hardness of market sharing games and congestion games for overlay network design. Our approach also yields a short proof for the PLS-completeness of network congestion games. In particular, we show that network congestion games are PLS-complete for directed and undirected networks even in case of linear latency functions. We study the quality of equilibrium in atomic splittable routing games. We show that in single-source single-sink games on series-parallel graphs, the price of collusion — the ratio of the total delay of atomic Nash equilibrium to the Wardrop equilibrium — is at most 1. This proves that the existing bounds on the price of anarchy for Wardrop equilibria carry over to atomic splittable routing games in this setting. We study network design games where @math self-interested agents have to form a network by purchasing links from a given set of edges. We consider Shapley cost sharing mechanisms that split the cost of an edge in a fair manner among the agents using the edge. It is well known that the price of anarchy of these games is as high as @math . Another line of research has focused on evaluating the price of stability, i.e., the cost of the best Nash equilibrium relative to the social optimum. In this paper we investigate to which extent coordination among agents can improve the quality of solutions. We resort to the concept of strong Nash equilibria, which were introduced by Aumann and are resilient to deviations by coalitions of agents. We analyze the price of anarchy of strong Nash equilibria and develop lower and upper bounds for unweighted and weighted games in both directed and undirected graphs. These bounds are tight or nearly tight for many scenarios. It shows that, by using coordination, the price of anarchy drops from linear to logarithmic bounds. We complement these results by also proving the first superconstant lower bound on the price of stability of standard equilibria (without coordination) in undirected graphs. More specifically, we show a lower bound of @math for weighted games, where @math is the total weight of all the agents. This almost matches the known upper bound of @math . Our results imply that, for most settings, the worst-case performance ratios of strong coordinated equilibria are essentially always as good as the performance ratios of the best equilibria achievable without coordination. These settings include unweighted games in directed graphs as well as weighted games in both directed and undirected graphs.