In this paper, we examine the robustness of Nash equilibria in continuous games, under both strategic and dynamic uncertainty. Starting with the former, we introduce the notion of a robust equilibrium as those equilibria that remain invariant to small--but otherwise arbitrary--perturbations to the game's payoff structure, and we provide a crisp geometric characterization thereof. Subsequently, we turn to the question of dynamic robustness, and we examine which equilibria may arise as stable limit points of the dynamics of "follow the regularized leader" (FTRL) in the presence of randomness and uncertainty. Despite their very distinct origins, we establish a structural correspondence between these two notions of robustness: strategic robustness implies dynamic robustness, and, conversely, the requirement of strategic robustness cannot be relaxed if dynamic robustness is to be maintained. Finally, we examine the rate of convergence to robust equilibria as a function of the underlying regularizer, and we show that entropically regularized learning converges at a geometric rate in games with affinely constrained action spaces.

We establish finite-time last-iterate guarantees for vanilla stochastic gradient descent in co-coercive games under noisy feedback. This is a broad class of games that is more general than strongly monotone games, allows for multiple Nash equilibria, and includes examples such as quadratic games with negative semidefinite interaction matrices and potential games with smooth concave potentials. Prior work in this setting has relied on relative noise models, where the noise vanishes as iterates approach equilibrium, an assumption that is often unrealistic in practice. We work instead under a substantially more general noise model in which the second moment of the noise is allowed to scale affinely with the squared norm of the iterates, an assumption natural in learning with unbounded action spaces. Under this model, we prove a last-iterate bound of order $O(\log(t)/t^{1/3})$, the first such bound for co-coercive games under non-vanishing noise. We additionally establish almost sure convergence of the iterates to the set of Nash equilibria and derive time-average convergence guarantees.

We examine the problem of regret minimization when the learner is involved in a continuous game with other optimizing agents: in this case, if all players follow a no-regret algorithm, it is possible to achieve significantly lower regret relative to fully adversarial environments. We study this problem in the context of variationally stable games (a class of continuous games which includes all convex-concave and monotone games), and when the players only have access to noisy estimates of their individual payoff gradients. If the noise is additive, the game-theoretic and purely adversarial settings enjoy similar regret guarantees; however, if the noise is \emph{multiplicative}, we show that the learners can, in fact, achieve \emph{constant} regret. We achieve this faster rate via an optimistic gradient scheme with \emph{learning rate separation} \textendash\ that is, the method's extrapolation and update steps are tuned to different schedules, depending on the noise profile. Subsequently, to eliminate the need for delicate hyperparameter tuning, we propose a fully adaptive method that smoothly interpolates between worst-and best-case regret guarantees.

In this paper, we examine the robustness of Nash equilibria in continuous games, under both strategic and dynamic uncertainty. Starting with the former, we introduce the notion of a robust equilibrium as those equilibria that remain invariant to small -- but otherwise arbitrary -- perturbations to the game's payoff structure, and we provide a crisp geometric characterization thereof. Subsequently, we turn to the question of dynamic robustness, and we examine which equilibria may arise as stable limit points of the dynamics of "follow the regularized leader" (FTRL) in the presence of randomness and uncertainty. Despite their very distinct origins, we establish a structural correspondence between these two notions of robustness: strategic robustness implies dynamic robustness, and, conversely, the requirement of strategic robustness cannot be relaxed if dynamic robustness is to be maintained. Finally, we examine the rate of convergence to robust equilibria as a function of the underlying regularizer, and we show that entropically regularized learning converges at a geometric rate in games with affinely constrained action spaces.

With the increased use of learning algorithms as a means to optimize agents' objectives in unknown

We examine the problem of regret minimization when the learner is involved in a continuous game with other optimizing agents: in this case, if all players follow a no-regret algorithm, it is possible to achieve significantly lower regret relative to fully adversarial environments. We study this problem in the context of variationally stable games (a class of continuous games which includes all convex-concave and monotone games), and when the players only have access to noisy estimates of their individual payoff gradients. If the noise is additive, the game-theoretic and purely adversarial settings enjoy similar regret guarantees; however, if the noise is \emph{multiplicative}, we show that the learners can, in fact, achieve \emph{constant} regret. We achieve this faster rate via an optimistic gradient scheme with \emph{learning rate separation} \textendash\ that is, the method's extrapolation and update steps are tuned to different schedules, depending on the noise profile. Subsequently, to eliminate the need for delicate hyperparameter tuning, we propose a fully adaptive method that smoothly interpolates between worst- and best-case regret guarantees.

Learning algorithms are often used to make decisions in sequential decision-making environments. In multi-agent settings, the decisions of each agent can affect the utilities/losses of the other agents. Therefore, if an agent is good at anticipating the behavior of the other agents, in particular how they will make decisions in each round as a function of their experience that far, it could try to judiciously make its own decisions over the rounds of the interaction so as to influence the other agents to behave in a way that ultimately benefits its own utility. In this paper, we study repeated two-player games involving two types of agents: a learner, which employs an online learning algorithm to choose its strategy in each round; and an optimizer, which knows the learner's utility function and the learner's online learning algorithm. The optimizer wants to plan ahead to maximize its own utility, while taking into account the learner's behavior. We provide two results: a positive result for repeated zero-sum games and a negative result for repeated general-sum games. Our positive result is an algorithm for the optimizer, which exactly maximizes its utility against a learner that plays the Replicator Dynamics -- the continuous-time analogue of Multiplicative Weights Update (MWU). Additionally, we use this result to provide an algorithm for the optimizer against MWU, i.e.~for the discrete-time setting, which guarantees an average utility for the optimizer that is higher than the value of the one-shot game. Our negative result shows that, unless P=NP, there is no Fully Polynomial Time Approximation Scheme (FPTAS) for maximizing the utility of an optimizer against a learner that best-responds to the history in each round. Yet, this still leaves open the question of whether there exists a polynomial-time algorithm that optimizes the utility up to $o(T)$.

There has been substantial progress on finding game-theoretic equilibria. Most of that work has focused on games with finite, discrete action spaces. However, many games involving space, time, money, and other fine-grained quantities have continuous action spaces (or are best modeled as such). We study the problem of finding an approximate Nash equilibrium of games with continuous action sets. The standard measure of closeness to Nash equilibrium is exploitability, which measures how much players can benefit from unilaterally changing their strategy. We propose two new methods that minimize an approximation of the exploitability with respect to the strategy profile. The first method uses a learned best-response function, which takes the current strategy profile as input and returns candidate best responses for each player. The strategy profile and best-response functions are trained simultaneously, with the former trying to minimize exploitability while the latter tries to maximize it. The second method maintains an ensemble of candidate best responses for each player. In each iteration, the best-performing elements of each ensemble are used to update the current strategy profile. The strategy profile and best-response ensembles are simultaneously trained to minimize and maximize the approximate exploitability, respectively. We evaluate our methods on various continuous games, showing that they outperform prior methods.

We propose a learning dynamics to model how strategic agents repeatedly play a continuous game while relying on an information platform to learn an unknown payoff-relevant parameter. In each time step, the platform updates a belief estimate of the parameter based on players' strategies and realized payoffs using Bayes's rule. Then, players adopt a generic learning rule to adjust their strategies based on the updated belief. We present results on the convergence of beliefs and strategies and the properties of convergent fixed points of the dynamics. We obtain sufficient and necessary conditions for the existence of globally stable fixed points. We also provide sufficient conditions for the local stability of fixed points. These results provide an approach to analyzing the long-term outcomes that arise from the interplay between Bayesian belief learning and strategy learning in games, and enable us to characterize conditions under which learning leads to a complete information equilibrium.