stackelberg game
- North America > United States > California > San Francisco County > San Francisco (0.14)
- Asia > Japan > Honshū > Chūgoku > Hiroshima Prefecture > Hiroshima (0.04)
- North America > United States > Louisiana > Orleans Parish > New Orleans (0.04)
- (4 more...)
- Information Technology > Game Theory (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Robots (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Optimization (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Reinforcement Learning (1.00)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > Alameda County > Berkeley (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- Education (0.68)
- Leisure & Entertainment (0.68)
- Information Technology > Game Theory (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Agents (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Optimization (0.68)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > Alameda County > Berkeley (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- Education (0.68)
- Leisure & Entertainment (0.68)
- Information Technology > Game Theory (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Agents (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Optimization (0.68)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Oxfordshire > Oxford (0.14)
- North America > United States > California > Los Angeles County > Los Angeles (0.04)
- Asia > Singapore (0.04)
- (3 more...)
- Leisure & Entertainment > Games (0.70)
- Information Technology (0.46)
- Asia > China (0.04)
- North America > United States > Illinois > Cook County > Chicago (0.04)
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania > Allegheny County > Pittsburgh (0.04)
- Leisure & Entertainment > Games (0.97)
- Government (0.68)
- North America > United States > California > Alameda County > Berkeley (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- (2 more...)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- North America > United States > Rhode Island > Providence County > Providence (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > Los Angeles County > Pomona (0.04)
- (3 more...)
- Leisure & Entertainment > Games (1.00)
- Banking & Finance (0.94)
- Europe > Switzerland > Zürich > Zürich (0.05)
- North America > United States > California > Los Angeles County > Los Angeles (0.04)
- North America > Canada (0.04)
- (2 more...)
- Transportation > Infrastructure & Services (0.68)
- Leisure & Entertainment > Games (0.47)
- Europe > Austria > Vienna (0.14)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.05)
- North America > United States > Rhode Island > Providence County > Providence (0.04)
- (6 more...)
Optimally Deceiving a Learning Leader in Stackelberg Games
Recent results in the ML community have revealed that learning algorithms used to compute the optimal strategy for the leader to commit to in a Stackelberg game, are susceptible to manipulation by the follower. Such a learning algorithm operates by querying the best responses or the payoffs of the follower, who consequently can deceive the algorithm by responding as if their payoffs were much different than what they actually are. For this strategic behavior to be successful, the main challenge faced by the follower is to pinpoint the payoffs that would make the learning algorithm compute a commitment so that best responding to it maximizes the follower's utility, according to the true payoffs. While this problem has been considered before, the related literature only focused on the simplified scenario in which the payoff space is finite, thus leaving the general version of the problem unanswered. In this paper, we fill this gap by showing that it is always possible for the follower to efficiently compute (near-)optimal payoffs for various scenarios of learning interaction between the leader and the follower.