On the complexity of strong Nash equilibrium: Hard-to-solve instances and smoothed complexity

The computational characterization of game-theoretic solution concepts is a central topic in artificial intelligence, with the aim of developing computationally efficient tools for finding optimal ways to behave in strategic interactions. The central solution concept in game theory is Nash equilibrium (NE). However, it fails to capture the possibility that agents can form coalitions (even in the 2-agent case). Strong Nash equilibrium (SNE) refines NE to this setting. It is known that finding an SNE is NP-complete when the number of agents is constant. This hardness is solely due to the existence of mixed-strategy SNEs, given that the problem of enumerating all pure-strategy SNEs is trivially in P. Our central result is that, in order for a game to have at least one non-pure-strategy SNE, the agents' payoffs restricted to the agents' supports must, in the case of 2 agents, lie on the same line, and, in the case of n agents, lie on an (n - 1)-dimensional hyperplane. Leveraging this result, we provide two contributions. First, we develop worst-case instances for support-enumeration algorithms. These instances have only one SNE and the support size can be chosen to be of any size-in particular, arbitrarily large. Second, we prove that, unlike NE, finding an SNE is in smoothed polynomial time: generic game instances (i.e., all instances except knife-edge cases) have only pure-strategy SNEs.

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

[2]  Moshe Tennenholtz,et al.  Strong and Correlated Strong Equilibria in Monotone Congestion Games , 2006, WINE.

[3]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  On the verification and computation of strong nash equilibrium , 2013, AAMAS.

[4]  Kim Fung Man,et al.  Multiobjective Optimization , 2011, IEEE Microwave Magazine.

[5]  R. Aumann Acceptable points in games of perfect information. , 1960 .

[6]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Multiagent Systems - Algorithmic, Game-Theoretic, and Logical Foundations , 2009 .

[7]  Guoqiang Tian,et al.  On the existence of strong Nash equilibria , 2014 .

[8]  R. Holzman,et al.  Strong Equilibrium in Congestion Games , 1997 .

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

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

[11]  Bodo Manthey,et al.  Smoothed Complexity Theory , 2012, MFCS.

[12]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Combining local search techniques and path following for bimatrix games , 2012, UAI.

[13]  Jérôme Monnot,et al.  On Strong Equilibria in the Max Cut Game , 2009, WINE.

[14]  Yishay Mansour,et al.  Strong equilibrium in cost sharing connection games , 2007, EC '07.

[15]  H. Kuk On equilibrium points in bimatrix games , 1996 .

[16]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Run the GAMUT: a comprehensive approach to evaluating game-theoretic algorithms , 2004, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2004. AAMAS 2004..

[17]  Martin Hoefer,et al.  On the Complexity of Pareto-Optimal Nash and Strong Equilibria , 2012, Theory of Computing Systems.

[18]  M. Ehrgott Multiobjective Optimization , 2008, AI Mag..

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

[20]  Paul W. Goldberg,et al.  The complexity of computing a Nash equilibrium , 2006, STOC '06.

[21]  Éva Tardos,et al.  The effect of collusion in congestion games , 2006, STOC '06.

[22]  Xi Chen,et al.  Computing Nash Equilibria: Approximation and Smoothed Complexity , 2006, 2006 47th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'06).