Nash Equilibrium and Bisimulation Invariance

Game theory provides a well-established framework for the analysis of concurrent and multi-agent systems. The basic idea is that concurrent processes (agents) can be understood as corresponding to players in a game; plays represent the possible computation runs of the system; and strategies define the behaviour of agents. Typically, strategies are modelled as functions from sequences of system states to player actions. Analysing a system in such a way involves computing the set of (Nash) equilibria in the game. However, we show that, with respect to the above model of strategies---the standard model in the literature---bisimilarity does not preserve the existence of Nash equilibria. Thus, two concurrent games which are behaviourally equivalent from a semantic perspective, and which from a logical perspective satisfy the same temporal formulae, nevertheless have fundamentally different properties from a game theoretic perspective. In this paper we explore the issues raised by this discovery, and investigate three models of strategies with respect to which the existence of Nash equilibria is preserved under bisimilarity. We also use some of these models of strategies to provide new semantic foundations for logics for strategic reasoning, and investigate restricted scenarios where bisimilarity can be shown to preserve the existence of Nash equilibria with respect to the conventional model of strategies in the literature.

[1]  Rob J. van Glabbeek,et al.  Branching time and abstraction in bisimulation semantics , 1996, JACM.

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

[3]  Robin Milner,et al.  Communication and concurrency , 1989, PHI Series in computer science.

[4]  Rohit Parikh,et al.  Game Logic - An Overview , 2003, Stud Logica.

[5]  P ? ? ? ? ? ? ? % ? ? ? ? , 1991 .

[6]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Nash Equilibrium and Bisimulation Invariance , 2019, Log. Methods Comput. Sci..

[7]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  EVE: A Tool for Temporal Equilibrium Analysis , 2018, ATVA.

[8]  Davide Sangiorgi,et al.  On the origins of bisimulation and coinduction , 2009, TOPL.

[9]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Equilibria of concurrent games on event structures , 2014, CSL-LICS.

[10]  Stephan Merz,et al.  Model Checking , 2000 .

[11]  C. A. R. Hoare,et al.  A Theory of Communicating Sequential Processes , 1984, JACM.

[12]  Rocco De Nicola,et al.  Three logics for branching bisimulation , 1995, JACM.

[13]  Valentin Goranko,et al.  Temporal Logics in Computer Science: Finite-State Systems , 2016, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science.

[14]  Thomas A. Henzinger,et al.  Alternating-time temporal logic , 1997, Proceedings 38th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[15]  Marta Z. Kwiatkowska,et al.  PRISM 4.0: Verification of Probabilistic Real-Time Systems , 2011, CAV.

[16]  Fred Kröger,et al.  Temporal Logic of Programs , 1987, EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science.

[17]  Dana Fisman,et al.  Rational Synthesis , 2009, TACAS.

[18]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  From model checking to equilibrium checking: Reactive modules for rational verification , 2016, Artif. Intell..

[19]  Randal E. Bryant,et al.  Symbolic Boolean manipulation with ordered binary-decision diagrams , 1992, CSUR.

[20]  J.F.A.K. van Benthem,et al.  Modal Correspondence Theory , 1977 .

[21]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  On the complexity of practical ATL model checking , 2006, AAMAS '06.

[22]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Design and Synthesis of Synchronization Skeletons Using Branching Time Temporal Logic , 2008, 25 Years of Model Checking.

[23]  Patrick Cousot,et al.  On Abstraction in Software Verification , 2002, CAV.

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

[25]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Reasoning about Strategies , 2013, Computation, Logic, Games, and Quantum Foundations.

[26]  Thomas A. Henzinger,et al.  Reactive Modules , 1996, Proceedings 11th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[27]  Bernd Finkbeiner,et al.  Coordination Logic , 2010, CSL.

[28]  Robin Milner,et al.  Algebraic laws for nondeterminism and concurrency , 1985, JACM.

[29]  Christel Baier,et al.  Principles of model checking , 2008 .

[30]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Iterated Boolean games , 2013, Inf. Comput..

[31]  Marc Pauly,et al.  A Modal Logic for Coalitional Power in Games , 2002, J. Log. Comput..

[32]  Marta Z. Kwiatkowska,et al.  PRISM-Games 2.0: A Tool for Multi-objective Strategy Synthesis for Stochastic Games , 2016, TACAS.

[33]  Thomas A. Henzinger,et al.  Alternating Refinement Relations , 1998, CONCUR.

[34]  Luca Aceto,et al.  Advanced Topics in Bisimulation and Coinduction , 2012, Cambridge tracts in theoretical computer science.

[35]  Alessio Lomuscio,et al.  MCMAS-SLK: A Model Checker for the Verification of Strategy Logic Specifications , 2014, CAV.

[36]  Orna Kupferman,et al.  Repairing Multi-Player Games , 2015, CONCUR.

[37]  Krishnendu Chatterjee,et al.  Strategy logic , 2007, Inf. Comput..

[38]  Dexter Kozen,et al.  RESULTS ON THE PROPOSITIONAL’p-CALCULUS , 2001 .

[39]  Robin Milner,et al.  A Calculus of Communicating Systems , 1980, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[40]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  A Tool for the Automated Verification of Nash Equilibria in Concurrent Games , 2015, ICTAC.

[41]  Aniello Murano,et al.  Reasoning About Strategies: On the Model-Checking Problem , 2011, ArXiv.

[42]  Barbara Messing,et al.  An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems , 2002, Künstliche Intell..

[43]  Thomas A. Henzinger,et al.  MOCHA: Modularity in Model Checking , 1998, CAV.

[44]  Romain Brenguier,et al.  PRALINE: A Tool for Computing Nash Equilibria in Concurrent Games , 2013, CAV.

[45]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Extensive Games as Process Models , 2002, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[46]  Patricia Bouyer,et al.  Pure Nash Equilibria in Concurrent Deterministic Games , 2015, Log. Methods Comput. Sci..

[47]  Patricia Bouyer,et al.  Nash Equilibria in Concurrent Games with Büchi Objectives , 2011, FSTTCS.

[48]  Aniello Murano,et al.  Reasoning about Strategies: on the Satisfiability Problem , 2016, Log. Methods Comput. Sci..

[49]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Rational Verification: From Model Checking to Equilibrium Checking , 2016, AAAI.

[50]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Expresiveness and Complexity Results for Strategic Reasoning , 2015, CONCUR.

[51]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Reasoning about equilibria in game-like concurrent systems , 2014, Ann. Pure Appl. Log..