Network Creation Games are a well-known approach for explaining and analyzing the structure, quality and dynamics of real-world networks like the Internet and other infrastructure networks which evolved via the interaction of selfish agents without a central authority. In these games selfish agents which correspond to nodes in a network strategically buy incident edges to improve their centrality. However, past research on these games has only considered the creation of networks with unit-weight edges. In practice, e.g. when constructing a fiber-optic network, the choice of which nodes to connect and also the induced price for a link crucially depends on the distance between the involved nodes and such settings can be modeled via edge-weighted graphs. We incorporate arbitrary edge weights by generalizing the well-known model by [PODC'03] to edge-weighted host graphs and focus on the geometric setting where the weights are induced by the distances in some metric space. In stark contrast to the state-of-the-art for the unit-weight version, where the Price of Anarchy is conjectured to be constant and where resolving this is a major open problem, we prove a tight non-constant bound on the Price of Anarchy for the metric version and a slightly weaker upper bound for the non-metric case. Moreover, we analyze the existence of equilibria, the computational hardness and the game dynamics for several natural metrics. The model we propose can be seen as the game-theoretic analogue of a variant of the classical Network Design Problem. Thus, low-cost equilibria of our game correspond to decentralized and stable approximations of the optimum network design.
Also related are network formation games where not centrality but some other property is the goal of each agent. There are games where agents simply want to be connected to all other agents, e.g. @cite_3 @cite_37 @cite_19 . Among them, the work by @cite_15 is closely related to our work. In their wireline strong connectivity game agents are points in the Euclidian plane who strategically buy incident edges to create a connected network. The edge price equals the length of the edge. This is similar to our model in the Euclidian plane with @math but the focus on connectivity changes the game completely. Another related geometric game was proposed by @cite_45 . Also there the agents are points in some metric space but agents pay a fixed price for each edge and try to minimize the total stretch towards all other agents. Guly 'a @cite_12 considered a network formation game in the hyperbolic plane where agents strive for maximum navigability. This is also a geometric model but drastically different from our approach.
@cite_37 @cite_3 @cite_19 @cite_45 @cite_15 @cite_12
2127116502 2155425465 2221218932 2157232743 1985266912 2203081190
We introduce a simple network design game that models how independent selfish agents can build or maintain a large network. In our game every agent has a specific connectivity requirement, i.e. each agent has a set of terminals and wants to build a network in which his terminals are connected. Possible edges in the network have costs and each agent's goal is to pay as little as possible. Determining whether or not a Nash equilibrium exists in this game is NP-complete. However, when the goal of each player is to connect a terminal to a common source, we prove that there is a Nash equilibrium as cheap as the optimal network, and give a polynomial time algorithm to find a (1+e)-approximate Nash equilibrium that does not cost much more. For the general connection game we prove that there is a 3-approximate Nash equilibrium that is as cheap as the optimal network, and give an algorithm to find a (4.65+e)-approximate Nash equilibrium that does not cost much more. Strategic network formation arises in settings where agents receive some benefit from their connectedness to other agents, but also incur costs for forming these links. We consider a new network formation game that incorporates an adversarial attack, as well as immunization or protection against the attack. An agent's network benefit is the expected size of her connected component post-attack, and agents may also choose to immunize themselves from attack at some additional cost. Our framework can be viewed as a stylized model of settings where reachability rather than centrality is the primary interest as in many technological networks such as the Internet, and vertices may be vulnerable to attacks such as viruses, but may also reduce risk via potentially costly measures such as an anti-virus software. Our main theoretical contributions include a strong bound on the edge density at equilibrium. In particular, we show that under a very mild assumption on the adversary's attack model, every equilibrium network contains at most only @math 2n-4 edges for @math ni¾?4, where n denotes the number of agents and this upper bound is tight. We also show that social welfare does not significantly erode: every non-trivial equilibrium with respect to several adversarial attack models asymptotically has social welfare at least as that of any equilibrium in the original attack-free model. We complement our sharp theoretical results by a behavioral experiment on our game with over 100 participants, where despite the complexity of the game, the resulting network was surprisingly close to equilibrium. In this paper, we study a basic network design game in which n self-interested agents, each having individual connectivity requirements, wish to build a network by purchasing links from a given set of edges. A fundamental cost-sharing mechanism is Shapley cost-sharing, which splits the cost of an edge in a fair manner among the agents using the edge. It is well known that in such games, the price of anarchy is n, while the price of stability is H(n), where H(n) denotes the nth harmonic number. We investigate whether an optimal minimum-cost network represents an attractive, relatively stable state that agents might want to purchase: what extra cost does an agent incur compared to a possible strategy deviation? We employ the concept of α-approximate Nash equilibria, in which no agent can reduce its cost by a factor of more than α. We prove that for single-source games in undirected graphs, every optimal network represents an H(n)-approximate Nash equilibrium. We show that this bound is tight by presenting a... We consider computational aspects of a game theoretic approach to network reliability. Consider a network where failure of one node may disrupt communication between two other nodes. We model this network as a simple coalitional game, called the vertex Connectivity Game (CG). In this game, each agent owns a vertex, and controls all the edges going to and from that vertex. A coalition of agents wins if it fully connects a certain subset of vertices in the graph, called the primary vertices. We show that power indices, which express an agent's ability to affect the outcome of the vertex connectivity game, can be used to identify significant possible points of failure in the communication network, and can thus be used to increase network reliability. We show that in general graphs, calculating the Banzhaf power index is #P-complete, but suggest a polynomial algorithm for calculating this index in trees. We also show a polynomial algorithm for computing the core of a CG, which allows a stable division of payments to coalition agents. 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. We consider a model of influence with a set of non-strategic agents and two strategic agents. The non-strategic agents have initial opinions and are linked through a simply connected network. They update their opinions as in the DeGroot model. The two strategic agents have fixed opinions, 1 and 0 respectively, and are characterized by the magnitude of the impact they can exert on non-strategic agents. Each strategic agent forms a link with one non-strategic agent in order to alter the average opinion that eventually emerges in the network. This procedure defines a zero-sum game whose players are the two strategic agents and whose strategy set is the set of non-strategic agents. We focus on the existence and the characterization of equilibria in pure strategy in this setting. Simple examples show that the existence of a pure strategy equilibrium does depend on the structure of the network. The characterization of equilibrium we obtain emphasizes on the one hand the influenceability of target agents and on the other hand their centrality whose natural measure in our context defines a new concept, related to betweenness centrality, that we call intermediacy. We also show that in the case where the two strategic agents have the same impact, symmetric equilibria emerge as natural solutions whereas in the case where the impacts are uneven, the strategic players generally have differentiated equilibrium targets, the high-impacts agent focusing on centrality and the low-impact agent on influenceability. Network design is a fundamental problem for which it is important to understand the effects of strategic behavior. Given a collection of self-interested agents who want to form a network connecting certain endpoints, the set of stable solutions—the Nash equilibria—may look quite different from the centrally enforced optimum. We study the quality of the best Nash equilibrium, and refer to the ratio of its cost to the optimum network cost as the price of stability. The best Nash equilibrium solution has a natural meaning of stability in this context—it is the optimal solution that can be proposed from which no user will defect. We consider the price of stability for network design with respect to one of the most widely studied protocols for network cost allocation, in which the cost of each edge is divided equally between users whose connections make use of it; this fair-division scheme can be derived from the Shapley value and has a number of basic economic motivations. We show that the price of stability for network design with respect to this fair cost allocation is @math , where @math is the number of users, and that a good Nash equilibrium can be achieved via best-response dynamics in which users iteratively defect from a starting solution. This establishes that the fair cost allocation protocol is in fact a useful mechanism for inducing strategic behavior to form near-optimal equilibria. We discuss connections to the class of potential games defined by Monderer and Shapley, and extend our results to cases in which users are seeking to balance network design costs with latencies in the constructed network, with stronger results when the network has only delays and no construction costs. We also present bounds on the convergence time of best-response dynamics, and discuss extensions to a weighted game. We investigate a non-cooperative game-theoretic model for the formation of communication networks by selfish agents. Each agent aims for a central position at minimum cost for creating edges. In particular, the general model (, PODC'03) became popular for studying the structure of the Internet or social networks. Despite its significance, locality in this game was first studied only recently (Bil , SPAA'14), where a worst case locality model was presented, which came with a high efficiency loss in terms of quality of equilibria. Our main contribution is a new and more optimistic view on locality: agents are limited in their knowledge and actions to their local view ranges, but can probe different strategies and finally choose the best. We study the influence of our locality notion on the hardness of computing best responses, convergence to equilibria, and quality of equilibria. Moreover, we compare the strength of local versus non-local strategy-changes. Our results address the gap between the original model and the worst case locality variant. On the bright side, our efficiency results are in line with observations from the original model, yet we have a non-constant lower bound on the price of anarchy. This paper presents the first study of the endogenous formation of networks by strategic, self-interested agents who benefit from producing and disseminating information. This work departs from previous works on network formation (especially in the economics literature) which assume that agents benefit only by acquiring information produced by other agents. The strategic production and dissemination of information have striking consequences. We show first that the network structure that emerges (in equilibrium) typically displays a core-periphery structure, with the few agents at the core playing the role of eeconnectorsee, creating and maintaining links to the agents at the periphery. We then determine conditions under which the networks that emerge are minimally connected and have short network diameters (properties that are important for efficiency). Finally, we show that the number of agents who produce information and the total amount of information produced in the network grow at the same rate as the agent population; this is in stark contrast to the "law of the few" that had been established in previous works which do not consider information dissemination. Two mobile agents (robots) with distinct labels have to meet in an arbitrary, possibly infinite, unknown connected graph or in an unknown connected terrain in the plane. Agents are modeled as points, and the route of each of them only depends on its label and on the unknown environment. The actual walk of each agent also depends on an asynchronous adversary that may arbitrarily vary the speed of the agent, stop it, or even move it back and forth, as long as the walk of the agent in each segment of its route is continuous, does not leave it and covers all of it. Meeting in a graph means that both agents must be at the same time in some node or in some point inside an edge of the graph, while meeting in a terrain means that both agents must be at the same time in some point of the terrain. Does there exist a deterministic algorithm that allows any two agents to meet in any unknown environment in spite of this very powerful adversary? We give deterministic rendezvous algorithms for agents starting at arbitrary nodes of any anonymous connected graph (finite or infinite) and for agents starting at any interior points with rational coordinates in any closed region of the plane with path-connected interior. While our algorithms work in a very general setting - agents can, indeed, meet almost everywhere - we show that none of the above few limitations imposed on the environment can be removed. On the other hand, our algorithm also guarantees the following approximate rendezvous for agents starting at arbitrary interior points of a terrain as above: agents will eventually get at an arbitrarily small positive distance from each other. In many multiagent settings, situations arise in which agents must collectively make decisions while not every agent is supposed to have an equal amount of influence in the outcome of such a decision. Weighted voting games are often used to deal with these situations. The amount of influence that an agent has in a weighted voting game can be measured by means of various power indices. This paper studies the problem of finding a weighted voting game in which the distribution of the influence among the agents is as close as possible to a given target value. We propose a method to exactly solve this problem. This method relies on a new efficient procedure for enumerating weighted voting games of a fixed number of agents. The enumeration algorithm we propose works by exploiting the properties of a specific partial order over the class of weighted voting games. The algorithm enumerates weighted voting games of a fixed number of agents in time exponential in the number of agents, and polynomial in the number of games output. As a consequence we obtain an exact anytime algorithm for designing weighted voting games. We consider strategic games that are inspired by Schelling's model of residential segregation. In our model, the agents are partitioned into k types and need to select locations on an undirected graph. Agents can be either stubborn, in which case they will always choose their preferred location, or strategic, in which case they aim to maximize the fraction of agents of their own type in their neighborhood. We investigate the existence of equilibria in these games, study the complexity of finding an equilibrium outcome or an outcome with high social welfare, and also provide upper and lower bounds on the price of anarchy and stability. Some of our results extend to the setting where the preferences of the agents over their neighbors are defined by a social network rather than a partition into types. In this paper, we introduce a game-theoretic framework to address the community detection problem based on the structures of social networks. We formulate the dynamics of community formation as a strategic game called community formation game: Given an underlying social graph, we assume that each node is a selfish agent who selects communities to join or leave based on her own utility measurement. A community structure can be interpreted as an equilibrium of this game. We formulate the agents' utility by the combination of a gain function and a loss function. We allow each agent to select multiple communities, which naturally captures the concept of "overlapping communities". We propose a gain function based on the modularity concept introduced by Newman (Proc Natl Acad Sci 103(23):8577---8582, 2006), and a simple loss function that reflects the intrinsic costs incurred when people join the communities. We conduct extensive experiments under this framework, and our results show that our algorithm is effective in identifying overlapping communities, and are often better then other algorithms we evaluated especially when many people belong to multiple communities. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time the community detection problem is addressed by a game-theoretic framework that considers community formation as the result of individual agents' rational behaviors. Network pricing games provide a framework for modeling real-world settings with two types of strategic agents: owners (operators) of the network and users of the network. Owners of the network post a price for usage of the link they own so as to attract users and maximize profit; users of the network select routes based on price and level of use by other users. We point out that an equilibrium in these games may not exist, may not be unique and may induce an arbitrarily inefficient network performance. Our main result is to observe that a simple regulation on the network owners market solves all three issues above. Specifically, if an authority could set appropriate caps (upper bounds) on the tolls (prices) operators can charge, then: the game among the link operators has a unique and strong Nash equilibrium and the users' game results in a Wardrop equilibrium that achieves the optimal total delay. We call any price vector with these properties a great set of tolls. As a secondary objective, we want to compute great tolls that minimize total users' payments and we provide a linear program that does this. We obtain multiplicative approximation results compared to the optimal total users' payments for arbitrary networks with polynomial latencies of bounded degree, while in the single-commodity case we obtain a bound that only depends on the topology of the network. Lastly, we show how the same mechanism of setting appropriate caps on the allowable prices extends to the model of elastic demands. Recently, there has been a growing interest in modeling planning with information constraints. Accordingly, an agent maximizes a regularized expected utility known as the free energy, where the regularizer is given by the information divergence from a prior to a posterior policy. While this approach can be justified in various ways, including from statistical mechanics and information theory, it is still unclear how it relates to decision-making against adversarial environments. This connection has previously been suggested in work relating the free energy to risk-sensitive control and to extensive form games. Here, we show that a single-agent free energy optimization is equivalent to a game between the agent and an imaginary adversary. The adversary can, by paying an exponential penalty, generate costs that diminish the decision maker's payoffs. It turns out that the optimal strategy of the adversary consists in choosing costs so as to render the decision maker indifferent among its choices, which is a definining property of a Nash equilibrium, thus tightening the connection between free energy optimization and game theory. Coalitions and cooperation are key topics in multi-agent systems (mas). They enable agents to achieve goals that they may not have been able to achieve independently. A range of previous studies have found that many problems in coalitional games tend to be computationally intractable - that is, the computational complexity grows rapidly as a function of the number of participating agents. However, these hardness results generally require that each agent is of a different type. Here, we observe that in many mas settings, while the number of agents may grow, the number of different types of agents remains small. We formally define the notion of agent types in cooperative games. We then re-examine the computational complexity of the different coalition formation problems when assuming that the number of agent types is fixed. We show that most of the previously hard problems become polynomial when the number of agent types is fixed. We consider multiple different game formulations and representations (characteristic function with subadditive utilities, crg, and graphical representations) and several different computational problems (including stability, core-emptiness, and Shapley value). Coalition formation is the process of bringing together two or more agents so as to achieve goals that individuals on their own cannot, or to achieve them more efficiently. Typically, in such situations, the agents have conflicting preferences over the set of possible joint goals. Thus, before the agents realize the benefits of cooperation, they must find a way of resolving these conflicts and reaching a consensus. In this context, cooperative game theory offers the voting game as a mechanism for agents to reach a consensus. It also offers the Shapley value as a way of measuring the influence or power a player has in determining the outcome of a voting game. Given this, the designer of a voting game wants to construct a game such that a player's Shapley value is equal to some desired value. This is called the inverse Shapley value problem. Solving this problem is necessary, for instance, to ensure fairness in the players' voting powers. However, from a computational perspective, finding a player's Shapley value for a given game is #P-complete. Consequently, the problem of verifying that a voting game does indeed yield the required powers to the agents is also #P-complete. Therefore, in order to overcome this problem we present a computationally efficient approximation algorithm for solving the inverse problem. This method is based on the technique of 'successive approximations'; it starts with some initial approximate solution and iteratively updates it such that after each iteration, the approximate gets closer to the required solution. This is an anytime algorithm and has time complexity polynomial in the number of players. We also analyze the performance of this method in terms of its approximation error and the rate of convergence of an initial solution to the required one. Specifically, we show that the former decreases after each iteration, and that the latter increases with the number of players and also with the initial approximation error. A distributed control law that guarantees connectivity maintenance in a network of multiple mobile agents is presented. The control law, which lets the agents perform formation manoeuvres, respects sensor limitations by allowing each agent to only take into account agents within its sensing radius. In contrast to previous approaches to the problem, the proposed control law does not attain infinite values whenever an edge of the communication graph tends to be lost. This is achieved via the use of decentralised navigation functions, which are bounded potential fields. The navigation functions are defined to take into account the connectivity maintenance objective. The authors first treat the case of connectivity maintenance for a static communication graph and then extend the result to the case of dynamic graphs. The results are illustrated on a formation control problem. In this work, we study the problem of power allocation and adaptive modulation in teams of decision makers. We consider the special case of two teams with each team consisting of two mobile agents. Agents belonging to the same team communicate over wireless ad hoc networks, and they try to split their available power between the tasks of communication and jamming the nodes of the other team. The agents have constraints on their total energy and instantaneous power usage. The cost function adopted is the difference between the rates of erroneously transmitted bits of each team. We model the adaptive modulation problem as a zero-sum matrix game which in turn gives rise to a a continuous kernel game to handle power control. Based on the communications model, we present sufficient conditions on the physical parameters of the agents for the existence of a pure strategy saddle-point equilibrium (PSSPE). This paper introduces SC2LE (StarCraft II Learning Environment), a reinforcement learning environment based on the StarCraft II game. This domain poses a new grand challenge for reinforcement learning, representing a more difficult class of problems than considered in most prior work. It is a multi-agent problem with multiple players interacting; there is imperfect information due to a partially observed map; it has a large action space involving the selection and control of hundreds of units; it has a large state space that must be observed solely from raw input feature planes; and it has delayed credit assignment requiring long-term strategies over thousands of steps. We describe the observation, action, and reward specification for the StarCraft II domain and provide an open source Python-based interface for communicating with the game engine. In addition to the main game maps, we provide a suite of mini-games focusing on different elements of StarCraft II gameplay. For the main game maps, we also provide an accompanying dataset of game replay data from human expert players. We give initial baseline results for neural networks trained from this data to predict game outcomes and player actions. Finally, we present initial baseline results for canonical deep reinforcement learning agents applied to the StarCraft II domain. On the mini-games, these agents learn to achieve a level of play that is comparable to a novice player. However, when trained on the main game, these agents are unable to make significant progress. Thus, SC2LE offers a new and challenging environment for exploring deep reinforcement learning algorithms and architectures.