Path disruption games

We propose Path Disruption Games (PDGs), which consider collaboration between agents attempting stop an adversary from travelling from a source node to a target node in a graph. PDGs can model physical or network security domains. The coalition attempts to stop the adversary by placing checkpoints in intermediate nodes in the graph, to make sure the adversary cannot travel through them. Thus, the coalition wins if it controls a node subset whose removal from the graph disconnects the source and target. We analyze this domain from a cooperative game theoretic perspective, and consider how the gains can be distributed between the agents controlling the vertices. We also consider power indices, which express the influence of each checkpoint location on the outcome of the game, and can be used to identify the most critical locations where checkpoints should be placed. We consider both general graphs and the restricted case of trees, and consider both a model with no cost for placing a checkpoint and a model with where each vertex has its own cost for placing a checkpoint.

[1]  Tomomi Matsui,et al.  NP-completeness for calculating power indices of weighted majority games , 2001, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[2]  A. Rubinstein,et al.  A Course in Game Theory , 1995 .

[3]  Ariel Rubinstein,et al.  A Course in Game Theory , 1995 .

[4]  Ely Porat,et al.  Power and stability in connectivity games , 2008, AAMAS.

[5]  Joan Feigenbaum,et al.  Sharing the Cost of Multicast Transmissions , 2001, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[6]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  A Tractable and Expressive Class of Marginal Contribution Nets and Its Applications , 2008, Math. Log. Q..

[7]  Jeffrey S. Rosenschein,et al.  Coalitional skill games , 2008, AAMAS.

[8]  L. S. Shapley,et al.  Geometric Properties of the Kernel, Nucleolus, and Related Solution Concepts , 1979, Math. Oper. Res..

[9]  T. Matsui,et al.  A SURVEY OF ALGORITHMS FOR CALCULATING POWER INDICES OF WEIGHTED MAJORITY GAMES , 2000 .

[10]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  A linear approximation method for the Shapley value , 2008, Artif. Intell..

[11]  Martin Shubik,et al.  A Method for Evaluating the Distribution of Power in a Committee System , 1954, American Political Science Review.

[12]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  ARMOR Security for Los Angeles International Airport , 2008, AAAI.

[13]  Evangelos Markakis,et al.  Approximating power indices , 2008, AAMAS.

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

[15]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  The impact of adversarial knowledge on adversarial planning in perimeter patrol , 2008, AAMAS.

[16]  Jeffrey S. Rosenschein,et al.  Power in threshold network flow games , 2009, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[17]  E. Kohlberg On the Nucleolus of a Characteristic Function Game , 1971 .

[18]  Jeffrey S. Rosenschein,et al.  The Cost of Stability in Network Flow Games , 2009, MFCS.

[19]  Xiaotie Deng,et al.  On the Complexity of Cooperative Solution Concepts , 1994, Math. Oper. Res..

[20]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[21]  Leslie G. Valiant,et al.  The Complexity of Enumeration and Reliability Problems , 1979, SIAM J. Comput..