Paper detail

Well-Supported versus Approximate Nash Equilibria: Query Complexity of Large Games

We study the randomized query complexity of approximate Nash equilibria (ANE) in large games. We prove that, for some constant $ε>0$, any randomized oracle algorithm that computes an $ε$-ANE in a binary-action, $n$-player game must make $2^{Ω(n/\log n)}$ payoff queries. For the stronger solution concept of well-supported Nash equilibria (WSNE), Babichenko previously gave an exponential $2^{Ω(n)}$ lower bound for the randomized query complexity of $ε$-WSNE, for some constant $ε>0$; the same lower bound was shown to hold for $ε$-ANE, but only when $ε=O(1/n)$. Our result answers an open problem posed by Hart and Nisan and Babichenko and is very close to the trivial upper bound of $2^n$. Our proof relies on a generic reduction from the problem of finding an $ε$-WSNE to the problem of finding an $ε/(4α)$-ANE, in large games with $α$ actions, which might be of independent interest.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.