Paper detail

An Experimental Study on Learning Correlated Equilibrium in Routing Games

We study route choice in a repeated routing game where an uncertain state of nature determines link latency functions, and agents receive private route recommendation. The state is sampled in an i.i.d. manner in every round from a publicly known distribution, and the recommendations are generated by a randomization policy whose mapping from the state is known publicly. In a one-shot setting, the agents are said to obey recommendation if it gives the smallest travel time in a posteriori expectation. A plausible extension to repeated setting is that the likelihood of following recommendation in a round is related to regret from previous rounds. If the regret is of satisficing type with respect to a default choice and is averaged over past rounds and over all agents, then the asymptotic outcome under an obedient recommendation policy coincides with the one-shot outcome. We report findings from an experiment with one participant at a time engaged in repeated route choice decision on computer. In every round, the participant is shown travel time distribution for each route, a route recommendation generated by an obedient policy, and a rating suggestive of average experience of previous participants with the quality of recommendation. Upon entering route choice, the actual travel times are revealed. The participant evaluates the quality of recommendation by submitting a review. This is combined with historical reviews to update rating for the next round. Data analysis from 33 participants each with 100 rounds suggests moderate negative correlation between the display rating and the average regret, and a strong positive correlation between the rating and the likelihood of following recommendation. Overall, under obedient recommendation policy, the rating converges close to its maximum value by the end of the experiments in conjunction with very high frequency of following recommendations.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors6 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.