On Stackelberg mixed strategies

It is sometimes the case that one solution concept in game theory is equivalent to applying another solution concept to a modified version of the game. In such cases, does it make sense to study the former separately (as it applies to the original representation of the game), or should we entirely subordinate it to the latter? The answer probably depends on the particular circumstances, and indeed the literature takes different approaches in different cases. In this article, I consider the specific example of Stackelberg mixed strategies. I argue that, even though a Stackelberg mixed strategy can also be seen as a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium of a corresponding extensive-form game, there remains significant value in studying it separately. The analysis of this special case may have implications for other solution concepts.

[1]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Stackelberg vs. Nash in Security Games: An Extended Investigation of Interchangeability, Equivalence, and Uniqueness , 2011, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[2]  Kousha Etessami,et al.  On the Complexity of Nash Equilibria and Other Fixed Points , 2010, SIAM J. Comput..

[3]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Simple search methods for finding a Nash equilibrium , 2004, Games Econ. Behav..

[4]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  New complexity results about Nash equilibria , 2008, Games Econ. Behav..

[5]  C. E. Lemke,et al.  Equilibrium Points of Bimatrix Games , 1964 .

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

[7]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  Three-Player Games Are Hard , 2005, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[8]  Todd R. Kaplan,et al.  A Program for Finding Nash Equilibria , 1993 .

[9]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Commitment to Correlated Strategies , 2011, AAAI.

[10]  Xiaotie Deng,et al.  Settling the complexity of computing two-player Nash equilibria , 2007, JACM.

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

[12]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Mixed-Integer Programming Methods for Finding Nash Equilibria , 2005, AAAI.

[13]  R. Aumann Subjectivity and Correlation in Randomized Strategies , 1974 .

[14]  M. Dufwenberg Game theory. , 2011, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[15]  Eitan Zemel,et al.  Nash and correlated equilibria: Some complexity considerations , 1989 .

[16]  Paul W. Goldberg,et al.  The Complexity of Computing a Nash Equilibrium , 2009, SIAM J. Comput..

[17]  Bernhard von Stengel,et al.  Leadership games with convex strategy sets , 2010, Games Econ. Behav..

[18]  Tim Roughgarden Stackelberg Scheduling Strategies , 2004, SIAM J. Comput..

[19]  L. G. H. Cijan A polynomial algorithm in linear programming , 1979 .

[20]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  On the Complexity of the Parity Argument and Other Inefficient Proofs of Existence , 1994, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[21]  L. Khachiyan Polynomial algorithms in linear programming , 1980 .

[22]  T. Schelling,et al.  The Strategy of Conflict. , 1961 .

[23]  Xiaotie Deng,et al.  Settling the Complexity of Two-Player Nash Equilibrium , 2006, 2006 47th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'06).

[24]  Rahul Savani,et al.  Hard‐to‐Solve Bimatrix Games , 2006 .

[25]  J. Neumann Zur Theorie der Gesellschaftsspiele , 1928 .

[26]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Using Game Theory for Los Angeles Airport Security , 2009, AI Mag..

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

[28]  Bo An,et al.  PROTECT - A Deployed Game Theoretic System for Strategic Security Allocation for the United States Coast Guard , 2012, AI Mag..

[29]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  On the value of commitment , 2013, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[30]  Milind Tambe,et al.  TRUSTS: Scheduling Randomized Patrols for Fare Inspection in Transit Systems , 2012, IAAI.

[31]  Ilan Adler The equivalence of linear programs and zero-sum games , 2013, Int. J. Game Theory.