Query-Efficient Algorithms to Find the Unique Nash Equilibrium in a Two-Player Zero-Sum Matrix Game
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- Researchers study the query complexity of identifying Nash equilibria in two-player zero-sum matrix games
- Query complexity refers to the number of entries an algorithm needs to access to compute a Nash equilibrium
- Grigoriadis and Khachiyan showed that deterministic algorithms require querying at least $\Omega(n^2)$ entries to compute an $\varepsilon$-approximate Nash equilibrium
- They also designed a randomized algorithm that queries $\mathcal O(\frac{n\log n}{\varepsilon^2})$ entries on average for an $\varepsilon$-approximate Nash equilibrium
- This study aims to characterize the query complexity for finding an exact Nash equilibrium with a unique solution concept
- A lower bound is established, showing that any randomized algorithm needs to query at least $\Omega(nk)$ entries on average, where $k$ represents the support size of one player's strategy
- A simple randomized algorithm is presented that returns the unique Nash equilibrium by querying at most $\mathcal O(nk^4 \cdot \text{polylog}(\frac{n}{\delta}))$ entries with probability $1-\delta$
- For scenarios with a pure-strategy Nash equilibrium (PSNE) as the unique solution concept, a simple deterministic algorithm is designed that finds this PSNE by querying at most $\mathcal O(n)$ entries
- The study contributes significantly to understanding information access requirements in two-player zero-sum matrix games and provides insights into efficient approaches for finding solutions.
Authors: Arnab Maiti, Ross Boczar, Kevin Jamieson, Lillian J. Ratliff
Abstract: We study the query complexity of identifying Nash equilibria in two-player zero-sum matrix games. Grigoriadis and Khachiyan (1995) showed that any deterministic algorithm needs to query $\Omega(n^2)$ entries in worst case from an $n\times n$ input matrix in order to compute an $\varepsilon$-approximate Nash equilibrium, where $\varepsilon<\frac{1}{2}$. Moreover, they designed a randomized algorithm that queries $\mathcal O(\frac{n\log n}{\varepsilon^2})$ entries from the input matrix in expectation and returns an $\varepsilon$-approximate Nash equilibrium when the entries of the matrix are bounded between $-1$ and $1$. However, these two results do not completely characterize the query complexity of finding an exact Nash equilibrium in two-player zero-sum matrix games. In this work, we characterize the query complexity of finding an exact Nash equilibrium for two-player zero-sum matrix games that have a unique Nash equilibrium $(x_\star,y_\star)$. We first show that any randomized algorithm needs to query $\Omega(nk)$ entries of the input matrix $A\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ in expectation in order to find the unique Nash equilibrium where $k=|\text{supp}(x_\star)|$. We complement this lower bound by presenting a simple randomized algorithm that, with probability $1-\delta$, returns the unique Nash equilibrium by querying at most $\mathcal O(nk^4\cdot \text{polylog}(\frac{n}{\delta}))$ entries of the input matrix $A\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$. In the special case when the unique Nash Equilibrium is a pure-strategy Nash equilibrium (PSNE), we design a simple deterministic algorithm that finds the PSNE by querying at most $\mathcal O(n)$ entries of the input matrix.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.