Paper detail

Behavior in a Shared Resource Game with Cooperative, Greedy, and Vigilante Players

We study a problem of trust in a distributed system in which a common resource is shared by multiple parties. In such naturally information-limited settings, parties abide by a behavioral protocol that leads to fair sharing of the resource. However, greedy players may defect from a cooperative protocol and achieve a greater than fair share of resources, often without significant adverse consequences to themselves. In this paper, we study the role of a few vigilante players who also defect from a cooperative resource-sharing protocol but only in response to perceived greedy behavior. For a simple model of engagement, we demonstrate surprisingly complex dynamics among greedy and vigilante players. We show that the best response function for the greedy-player under our formulation has a jump discontinuity, which leads to conditions under which there is no Nash equilibrium. To study this property, we formulate an exact representation for the greedy player best response function in the case when there is one greedy player, one vigilante player and $N-2$ cooperative players. We use this formulation to show conditions under which a Nash equilibrium exists. We also illustrate that in the case when there is no Nash equilibrium, then the discrete dynamic system generated from fictitious play will not converge, but will oscillate indefinitely as a result of the jump discontinuity. The case of multiple vigilante and greedy players is studied numerically. Finally, we explore the relationship between fictitious play and the better response dynamics (gradient descent) and illustrate that this dynamical system can have a fixed point even when the discrete dynamical system arising from fictitious play does not.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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.