Examples range from multiagent planning, That is, we look for the most representative voter and return to crowdsourcing and human computation, to collaborative her ballot as the outcome. In our example, a natural choice filtering for recommender systems, to rank aggregation would be any of the voters voting (0, 1, 1). The distance of for search engines, to coordination and resource allocation this choice to the individual ballots is 42 (21 voters disagree in multiagent systems. Several frameworks have been on 2 issues each), i.e., this solution is only marginally worse proposed in the literature on computational social choice than the solution returned by the distance-based rule--and it (Chevaleyre et al. 2007; Brandt, Conitzer, and Endriss 2013) is optimal in case (1, 1, 1) is infeasible.

While stable matching problems are widely studied, little work has investigated schemes for effectively eliciting agent preferences using either preference (e.g., comparison) queries for interviews (to form such comparisons); and no work has addressed how to combine both. We develop a new model for representing and assessing agent preferences that accommodates both forms of information and (heuristically) minimizes the number of queries and interviews required to determine a stable matching. Our Refine-then-Interview (RtI) scheme uses coarse preference queries to refine knowledge of agent preferences and relies on interviews only to assess comparisons of relatively “close” options. Empirical results show that RtI compares favorably to a recent pure interview minimization algorithm, and that the number of interviews it requires is generally independent of the size of the market.

Extensive-form games are a powerful tool for representing complex multi-agent interactions. Nash equilibrium strategies are commonly used as a solution concept for extensive-form games, but many games are too large for the computation of Nash equilibria to be tractable. In these large games, exploitability has traditionally been used to measure deviation from Nash equilibrium, and thus strategies are aimed to achieve minimal exploitability. However, while exploitability measures a strategy's worst-case performance, it fails to capture how likely that worst-case is to be observed in practice. In fact, empirical evidence has shown that a less exploitable strategy can perform worse than a more exploitable strategy in one-on-one play against a variety of opponents. In this work, we propose a class of response functions that can be used to measure the strength of a strategy. We prove that standard no-regret algorithms can be used to learn optimal strategies for a scenario where the opponent uses one of these response functions. We demonstrate the effectiveness of this technique in Leduc Hold'em against opponents that use the UCT Monte Carlo tree search algorithm.

We present a novel extension of normal form games that we call biased games. In these games, a player's utility is influenced by the distance between his mixed strategy and a given base strategy. We argue that biased games capture important aspects of the interaction between software agents. Our main result is that biased games satisfying certain mild conditions always admit an equilibrium. We also tackle the computation of equilibria in biased games.

Decomposition, i.e. independently analyzing possible subgames, has proven to be an essential principle for effective decision-making in perfect information games. However, in imperfect information games, decomposition has proven to be problematic. To date, all proposed techniques for decomposition in imperfect information games have abandoned theoretical guarantees. This work presents the first technique for decomposing an imperfect information game into subgames that can be solved independently, while retaining optimality guarantees on the full-game solution. We can use this technique to construct theoretically justified algorithms that make better use of information available at run-time, overcome memory or disk limitations at run-time, or make a time/space trade-off to overcome memory or disk limitations while solving a game. In particular, we present an algorithm for subgame solving which guarantees performance in the whole game, in contrast to existing methods which may have unbounded error. In addition, we present an offline game solving algorithm, CFR-D, which can produce a Nash equilibrium for a game that is larger than available storage.

Regret matching is a widely-used algorithm for learning how to act. We begin by proving that regrets on actions in one setting (game) can be transferred to warm start the regrets for solving a different setting with same structure but different payoffs that can be written as a function of parameters. We prove how this can be done by carefully discounting the prior regrets. This provides, to our knowledge, the first principled warm-starting method for no-regret learning. It also extends to warm-starting the widely-adopted counterfactual regret minimization (CFR) algorithm for large incomplete-information games; we show this experimentally as well. We then study optimizing a parameter vector for a player in a two-player zero-sum game (e.g., optimizing bet sizes to use in poker). We propose a custom gradient descent algorithm that provably finds a locally optimal parameter vector while leveraging our warm-start theory to significantly save regret-matching iterations at each step. It optimizes the parameter vector while simultaneously finding an equilibrium. We present experiments in no-limit Leduc Hold'em and no-limit Texas Hold'em to optimize bet sizing. This amounts to the first action abstraction algorithm (algorithm for selecting a small number of discrete actions to use from a continuum of actions---a key preprocessing step for solving large games using current equilibrium-finding algorithms) with convergence guarantees for extensive-form games.

Most work building on the Stackelberg security games model assumes that the attacker can perfectly observe the defender's randomized assignment of resources to targets. This assumption has been challenged by recent papers, which designed tailor-made algorithms that compute optimal defender strategies for security games with limited surveillance. We analytically demonstrate that in zero-sum security games, lazy defenders, who simply keep optimizing against perfectly informed attackers, are almost optimal against diligent attackers, who go to the effort of gathering a reasonable number of observations. This result implies that, in some realistic situations, limited surveillance may not need to be explicitly addressed.

Balanced knockout tournaments are one of the most common formats for sports competitions, and are also used in elections and decision-making. We consider the computational problem of finding the optimal draw for a particular player in such a tournament. The problem has generated considerable research within AI in recent years. We prove that checking whether there exists a draw in which a player wins is NP-complete, thereby settling an outstanding open problem. Our main result has a number of interesting implications on related counting and approximation problems. We present a memoization-based algorithm for the problem that is faster than previous approaches. Moreover, we highlight two natural cases that can be solved in polynomial time. All of our results also hold for the more general problem of counting the number of draws in which a given player is the winner.

Combinatorial auctions are multiple-item auctions in which bidders may place bids on any package (subset) of goods. This additional expressibility produces benefits that have led to combinatorial auctions becoming extremely important both in practice and in theory. In the computer science community, auction design has focused primarily on computational practicality and incentive compatibility. The latter concerns mechanisms that are resistant to bidders misrepresenting themselves via a single false identity; however, with modern forms of bid submission, such as electronic bidding, other types of cheating have become feasible. Prominent amongst them is false-name bidding; that is, bidding under pseudonyms. For example, the ubiquitous Vickrey-Clarke-Groves (VCG) mechanism is incentive compatible and produces optimal allocations, but it is not false-name-proof–bidders can increase their utility by submitting bids under multiple identifiers. Thus, there has recently been much interest in the design and analysis of false-name-proof auction mechanisms. These false-name-proof mechanisms, however, have polynomially small efficiency guarantees: they can produce allocations with very low economic efficiency/social welfare. In contrast, we show that, provided the degree to which different goods are complementary is bounded (as is the case in many important, practical auctions), the VCG mechanism gives a constant efficiency guarantee. Constant efficiency guarantees hold even at equilibria where the agents bid in a manner that is not individually rational. Thus, while an individual bidder may personally benefit greatly from making false-name bids, this will have only a small detrimental effect on the objective of the auctioneer: maximizing economic efficiency. So, from the auctioneer's viewpoint the VCG mechanism remains preferable to false-name-proof mechanisms.

Game designs often center on the game mechanics - rules governing the logical evolution of the game. We seek to develop an intelligent system that generates computer games. As first steps towards this goal we present a composable and cross-domain representation for game mechanics that draws from AI planning action representations. We use a constraint solver to generate mechanics subject to design requirements on the form of those mechanics - what they do in the game. A planner takes a set of generated mechanics and tests whether those mechanics meet playability requirements - controlling how mechanics function in a game to affect player behavior. We demonstrate our system by modeling and generating mechanics in a role-playing game, platformer game, and combined role-playing-platformer game.