Goto

Collaborating Authors

 side payment


Learning Strategic Value and Cooperation in Multi-Player Stochastic Games through Side Payments

Kuhnle, Alan, Richley, Jeffrey, Perez-Lavin, Darleen

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

For general-sum, n-player, strategic games with transferable utility, the Harsanyi-Shapley value provides a computable method to both 1) quantify the strategic value of a player; and 2) make cooperation rational through side payments. We give a simple formula to compute the HS value in normal-form games. Next, we provide two methods to generalize the HS values to stochastic (or Markov) games, and show that one of them may be computed using generalized Q-learning algorithms. Finally, an empirical validation is performed on stochastic grid-games with three or more players. Source code is provided to compute HS values for both the normal-form and stochastic game setting.


A Bargaining Mechanism for One-Way Games

Abeliuk, Andres (NICTA and University of Melbourne) | Berbeglia, Gerardo (NICTA and University of Melbourne) | Hentenryck, Pascal Van (NICTA and Australian National University)

AAAI Conferences

We introduce one-way games, a framework motivated by applications in large-scale power restoration, humanitarian logistics, and integrated supply-chains. The distinguishable feature of the games is that the payoff of some player is determined only by her own strategy and does not depend on actions taken by other players. We show that the equilibrium outcome in one-way games without payments and the social cost of any ex-post efficient mechanism, can be far from the optimum. We also show that it is impossible to design a Bayes-Nash incentive-compatible mechanism for one-way games that is budget-balanced, individually rational, and efficient. Finally, we propose a privacy-preserving mechanism that is incentive-compatible and budget-balanced, satisfies ex-post individual rationality conditions, and produces an outcome which is more efficient than the equilibrium without payments.


Tradeoffs between Incentive Mechanisms in Boolean Games

Levit, Vadim (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev) | Komarovsky, Zohar (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev) | Grinshpoun, Tal (Ariel University) | Meisels, Amnon (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev)

AAAI Conferences

Two incentive mechanisms for Boolean games were proposed recently - taxation schemes and side payments. Both mechanisms have been shown to be able to secure a pure Nash equilibrium (PNE) for Boolean games. A complete characterization of outcomes that can be transformed to PNEs is given for each of the two incentive mechanisms. Side payments are proved to be a weaker mechanism in the sense that the outcomes that they can transform to PNEs are a subset of those transformable by taxation. A family of social-network-based Boolean games, which demonstrates the differences between the two mechanisms for securing a PNE, is presented. A distributed search algorithm for finding the side payments needed for securing a PNE is proposed. An empirical evaluation demonstrates the properties of the two mechanisms on the family of social-network-based Boolean games.


Negotiating Socially Optimal Allocations of Resources

Endriss, U., Maudet, N., Sadri, F., Toni, F.

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

A multiagent system may be thought of as an artificial society of autonomous software agents and we can apply concepts borrowed from welfare economics and social choice theory to assess the social welfare of such an agent society. In this paper, we study an abstract negotiation framework where agents can agree on multilateral deals to exchange bundles of indivisible resources. We then analyse how these deals affect social welfare for different instances of the basic framework and different interpretations of the concept of social welfare itself. In particular, we show how certain classes of deals are both sufficient and necessary to guarantee that a socially optimal allocation of resources will be reached eventually.