PROTECT: a deployed game theoretic system to protect the ports of the United States

While three deployed applications of game theory for security have recently been reported at AAMAS [12], we as a community remain in the early stages of these deployments; there is a continuing need to understand the core principles for innovative security applications of game theory. Towards that end, this paper presents PROTECT, a game-theoretic system deployed by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) in the port of Boston for scheduling their patrols. USCG has termed the deployment of PROTECT in Boston a success, and efforts are underway to test it in the port of New York, with the potential for nationwide deployment. PROTECT is premised on an attacker-defender Stackelberg game model and offers five key innovations. First, this system is a departure from the assumption of perfect adversary rationality noted in previous work, relying instead on a quantal response (QR) model of the adversary's behavior --- to the best of our knowledge, this is the first real-world deployment of the QR model. Second, to improve PROTECT's efficiency, we generate a compact representation of the defender's strategy space, exploiting equivalence and dominance. Third, we show how to practically model a real maritime patrolling problem as a Stackelberg game. Fourth, our experimental results illustrate that PROTECT's QR model more robustly handles real-world uncertainties than a perfect rationality model. Finally, in evaluating PROTECT, this paper for the first time provides real-world data: (i) comparison of human-generated vs PROTECT security schedules, and (ii) results from an Adversarial Perspective Team's (human mock attackers) analysis.

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

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

[3]  Michal Pechoucek,et al.  Using Multi-agent Simulation to Improve the Security of Maritime Transit , 2011, MABS.

[4]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Adversarial Uncertainty in Multi-Robot Patrol , 2009, IJCAI.

[5]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Approximation methods for infinite Bayesian Stackelberg games: modeling distributional payoff uncertainty , 2011, AAMAS.

[6]  Kevin Leyton-Brown,et al.  Beyond equilibrium: predicting human behaviour in normal form games , 2010, AAAI.

[7]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Security and Game Theory - Algorithms, Deployed Systems, Lessons Learned , 2011 .

[8]  Thomas R. Palfrey,et al.  Heterogeneous quantal response equilibrium and cognitive hierarchies , 2006, J. Econ. Theory.

[9]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Solving Stackelberg games with uncertain observability , 2011, AAMAS.

[10]  Dennis C Blair,et al.  Annual Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence , 2010 .

[11]  Manish Jain,et al.  Risk-Averse Strategies for Security Games with Execution and Observational Uncertainty , 2011, AAAI.

[12]  Rong Yang,et al.  Computing optimal strategy against quantal response in security games , 2012, AAMAS.

[13]  Drew Fudenberg,et al.  Game theory (3. pr.) , 1991 .

[14]  R. McKelvey,et al.  Quantal Response Equilibria for Normal Form Games , 1995 .

[15]  ปิยดา สมบัติวัฒนา Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction , 2013 .

[16]  Rong Yang,et al.  Improving Resource Allocation Strategy against Human Adversaries in Security Games , 2011, IJCAI.

[17]  Milind Tambe Security and Game Theory: EFFICIENT ALGORITHMS FOR MASSIVE SECURITY GAMES , 2011 .