Optimal defender allocation for massive security games : A branch and price approach

Algorithms to solve security games, an important class of Stackelberg games, have seen successful real-world deployment by LAX police and the Federal Air Marshal Service. These algorithms provide randomized schedules to optimally allocate limited security resources for infrastructure protection. Unfortunately, these stateof-the-art algorithms fail to scale-up or to provide a correct solution for massive security games with arbitrary scheduling constraints. This paper provides ASPEN, a branch-and-price algorithm to overcome this limitation based on two key contributions: (i) A column-generation approach that exploits an innovative compact network flow representation, avoiding a combinatorial explosion of schedule allocations; (ii) A branch-and-bound approach with novel upper-bound generation via a fast algorithm for solving under-constrained security games. ASPEN is the first known method for efficiently solving real-world-sized security games with arbitrary schedules. This work contributes to a very new area of work that applies techniques used in large-scale optimization to game-theoretic problems—an exciting new avenue with the potential to greatly expand the reach of game theory.

[1]  Nicola Gatti,et al.  Game Theoretical Insights in Strategic Patrolling: Model and Algorithm in Normal-Form , 2008, ECAI.

[2]  A. Haurie,et al.  Sequential Stackelberg equilibria in two-person games , 1985 .

[3]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Deployed ARMOR protection: the application of a game theoretic model for security at the Los Angeles International Airport , 2008, AAMAS.

[4]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Security and Game Theory: IRIS – A Tool for Strategic Security Allocation in Transportation Networks , 2011, AAMAS 2011.

[5]  Avrim Blum,et al.  Planning in the Presence of Cost Functions Controlled by an Adversary , 2003, ICML.

[6]  Manish Jain,et al.  Computing optimal randomized resource allocations for massive security games , 2009, AAMAS.

[7]  References , 1971 .

[8]  Martin W. P. Savelsbergh,et al.  Branch-and-Price: Column Generation for Solving Huge Integer Programs , 1998, Oper. Res..

[9]  John N. Tsitsiklis,et al.  Introduction to linear optimization , 1997, Athena scientific optimization and computation series.

[10]  George B. Dantzig,et al.  Decomposition Principle for Linear Programs , 1960 .

[11]  Nicola Basilico,et al.  Leader-follower strategies for robotic patrolling in environments with arbitrary topologies , 2009, AAMAS.

[12]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Multi-Step Multi-Sensor Hider-Seeker Games , 2009, IJCAI.

[13]  Manish Jain,et al.  Security applications: lessons of real-world deployment , 2009, SECO.

[14]  B. Stengel,et al.  Leadership with commitment to mixed strategies , 2004 .

[15]  G. Leitmann On generalized Stackelberg strategies , 1978 .

[16]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Complexity of Computing Optimal Stackelberg Strategies in Security Resource Allocation Games , 2010, AAAI.

[17]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Computing the optimal strategy to commit to , 2006, EC '06.