Paper detail

Settling the complexity of computing approximate two-player Nash equilibria

We prove that there exists a constant $ε>0$ such that, assuming the Exponential Time Hypothesis for PPAD, computing an $ε$-approximate Nash equilibrium in a two-player (nXn) game requires quasi-polynomial time, $n^{\log^{1-o(1)} n}$. This matches (up to the o(1) term) the algorithm of Lipton, Markakis, and Mehta [LMM03]. Our proof relies on a variety of techniques from the study of probabilistically checkable proofs (PCP); this is the first time that such ideas are used for a reduction between problems inside PPAD. En route, we also prove new hardness results for computing Nash equilibria in games with many players. In particular, we show that computing an $ε$-approximate Nash equilibrium in a game with n players requires $2^{Ω(n)}$ oracle queries to the payoff tensors. This resolves an open problem posed by Hart and Nisan [HN13], Babichenko [Bab14], and Chen et al. [CCT15]. In fact, our results for n-player games are stronger: they hold with respect to the $(ε,δ)$-WeakNash relaxation recently introduced by Babichenko et al. [BPR16].

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 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.