Paper detail

Fault Tolerant Equilibria in Anonymous Games: best response correspondences and fixed points

The notion of fault tolerant Nash equilibria has been introduced as a way of studying the robustness of Nash equilibria. Under this notion, a fixed number of players are allowed to exhibit faulty behavior in which they may deviate arbitrarily from an equilibrium strategy. A Nash equilibrium in a game with $N$ players is said to be $α$-tolerant if no non-faulty user wants to deviate from an equilibrium strategy as long as $N-α-1$ other players are playing the equilibrium strategies, i.e., it is robust to deviations from rationality by $α$ faulty players. In prior work, $α$-tolerance has been largely viewed as a property of a given Nash equilibria. Here, instead we consider following Nash's approach for showing the existence of equilibria, namely, through the use of best response correspondences and fixed-point arguments. In this manner, we provide sufficient conditions for the existence an $α$-tolerant equilibrium. This involves first defining an $α$-tolerant best response correspondence. Given a strategy profile of non-faulty agents, this correspondence contains strategies for a non-faulty player that are a best response given any strategy profile of the faulty players. We prove that if this correspondence is non-empty, then it is upper-hemi-continuous. This enables us to apply Kakutani's fixed-point theorem and argue that if this correspondence is non-empty for every strategy profile of the non-faulty players then there exists an $α$-tolerant equilibrium. However, we also illustrate by examples, that in many games this best response correspondence will be empty for some strategy profiles even though $α$-tolerant equilibira still exist.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 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.