Paper detail

Computing Approximate Nash Equilibria in Polymatrix Games

In an $ε$-Nash equilibrium, a player can gain at most $ε$ by unilaterally changing his behaviour. For two-player (bimatrix) games with payoffs in $[0,1]$, the best-known$ε$ achievable in polynomial time is 0.3393. In general, for $n$-player games an $ε$-Nash equilibrium can be computed in polynomial time for an $ε$ that is an increasing function of $n$ but does not depend on the number of strategies of the players. For three-player and four-player games the corresponding values of $ε$ are 0.6022 and 0.7153, respectively. Polymatrix games are a restriction of general $n$-player games where a player's payoff is the sum of payoffs from a number of bimatrix games. There exists a very small but constant $ε$ such that computing an $ε$-Nash equilibrium of a polymatrix game is \PPAD-hard. Our main result is that a $(0.5+δ)$-Nash equilibrium of an $n$-player polymatrix game can be computed in time polynomial in the input size and $\frac{1}δ$. Inspired by the algorithm of Tsaknakis and Spirakis, our algorithm uses gradient descent on the maximum regret of the players. We also show that this algorithm can be applied to efficiently find a $(0.5+δ)$-Nash equilibrium in a two-player Bayesian game.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.