Intention Games: Towards Strategic Coexistence between Partially Honest and Blind Players

Aditya Ahuja

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1712.09259

Intention Games: Towards Strategic Coexistence between Partially Honest and Blind Players

Aditya Ahuja

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Strategic interactions between competitive entities are generally considered from the perspective of complete revelation of benefits achieved from those interactions, in the form of public payoff functions and/or beliefs, in the announced games. However, there exist strategic interplays between competitors where the players have a choice to strategise under the availability of private payoffs, in similar competitive settings. In this contribution, we propose a formal framework for a competitive ecosystem where each player is permitted to defect from publicly optimal strategies under certain private payoffs greater than announced payoffs, given that these defections have certain acceptable bounds in the long run as agreed by all players. We call this game theoretic construction an Intention Game. We formally define an Intention Game, and notions of participational equilibria that exist in such interactions that permit public defections. We compare Intention Games with conventional strategic form games, and demonstrate a type-theoretic construction of Intention Games. In a partially honest setting, we give Intention Game instances of a Cournot competition, secure interactions between mobile applications, an Internet services' data sourcing competition between Internet service providers through content delivery networks, and a Bitcoin mining competition. We give a use of Intention Games to determine player participation in a cryptographic protocol. Finally, we demonstrate the possibility of a dual model of the Intention Games framework.

Explore related subjects

cs.GT cs.CR

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Aditya Ahuja. 2017-12-26. Intention Games: Towards Strategic Coexistence between Partially Honest and Blind Players. https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.09259

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

MMS Allocation for Chores with Online Agent Arrivals

We study the fair allocation of $m$ indivisible chores to $n$ agents with subadditive cost functions arriving online in an arbitrary order. Upon an agent's arrival, we are informed of her cost function and must irrevocably assign her a set of chores. We focus on the Maximin Share (MMS) fairness notion and aim to compute an allocation in which all items are assigned, and no agent incurs a cost more than $\alpha$ times her MMS. Without any prior information about the instance (other than $n$ and $m$), we design an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{n, k\log^{1+\epsilon}k, \log m\})$ for any constant $\epsilon > 0$, where $k$ denotes the number of cost function types. Our bound matches the best known offline approximation guarantees for MMS under subadditive costs and is nearly optimal with respect to all three parameters: we show that even for binary additive cost functions, no online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio of $o(\min\{n, k\log k, \log m\})$. We then consider the setting in which the $k$ cost function types are known in advance (though the realized types of arriving agents are not). For additive cost functions, we provide an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{\log k, \log(kn)/\log\log(kn)\})$, and show that constant-competitive algorithms do not exist for general $k$, even for the binary additive setting. For binary additive functions when $k \le n$, we propose a $3$-competitive algorithm and establish a lower bound of $2$.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Truncated Noisy Best-Response Algorithms: Toward Game Theoretic Learning with Safety Guarantees

We consider a game theoretic approach to solve multi-agent coordination problems with submodular maximization objectives. It is known for such problems that the Nash equilibria for the corresponding game are always within 50% of the optimal, but that the equilibria which achieve this worst-case bound are not stable. To exploit this instability, we propose a family of algorithms which we call Truncated Noisy Best-Response (TNBR) Algorithms. These algorithms are flexibly characterized by agents asynchronously and stochastically selecting actions from a neighbourhood of their best response payoffs. We compute bounds on the recurrent classes of TNBR algorithms' associated Markov chains. Our bounds fall into two categories: first, "Performance" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms always have a high-value recurrent state; second, "Safety" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms never have arbitrarily-bad recurrent states. Furthermore, these two types of bounds are linked by a waterbed-like effect: every game with a poor Safety guarantee necessarily has a favorable Performance guarantee.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Existence of the Core in Approval-Based Committee Elections

We settle the main open question in the theory of approval-based multi-winner elections: we show that there always exists a committee in the core. The core is a stability and group fairness concept. The proof introduces a new voting rule that optimizes an entropy-like objective function over committees and payment systems. All local optima of this objective function lie in the core, which implies that a core committee can be found in polynomial time.

cs.GT↗