CS364A: Algorithmic Game Theory Lecture #1: Introduction and Examples
نویسنده
چکیده
We begin with a cautionary tale. In 2012, the Olympics were held in London. One of the biggest scandals of the event concerned, of all sports, women’s badminton. The scandal did not involve any failed drug tests, but rather a failed tournament design that did not carefully consider incentives. The tournament design that was used is familiar from the World Cup soccer. There are four groups (A,B,C,D) of four teams each. The tournament has two phases. In the first ”round-robin” phase, each team plays the other three teams in its group, and does not play teams in other groups. The top two teams from each group advance to the second phase, the bottom two teams from each group are eliminated. In the second phase, the remaining eight teams play a standard ”knockout” tournament (as in tennis, for example): there are four quarterfinals (with the losers eliminated), then two semifinals (with the losers playing an extra match to decide the bronze model), and then the final (the winner gets the gold, the loser the silver). The incentives of participants and of the Olympics committee (and fans) are not necessarily aligned in such a tournament. What does a team want? To get as good a medal as possible, of course. What does the Olympics committee want? They didn’t seem to think carefully about this question, but in hindsight it’s clear that they want every team to try their best to win every match. Why, you ask, would a team ever want to lose a match?
منابع مشابه
CS364A: Algorithmic Game Theory Lecture #20: Mixed Nash Equilibria and PPAD-Completeness∗
Today we continue our study of the limitations of learning dynamics and polynomial-time algorithms for converging to and computing equilibria. Recall that we have sweeping positive results for coarse correlated and correlated equilibria, which are tractable in arbitrary games. We have only partial positive results for pure Nash equilibria of routing and congestion games, and last lecture we dev...
متن کاملCS364A: Algorithmic Game Theory Lecture #7: Multi-Parameter Mechanism Design and the VCG Mechanism∗
Thus far, we have only considered single-parameter mechanism design problems, where each participant has just one piece of private information, its valuation per unit of stuff. In many problems, a participant has different private valuations for different goods. Once we are unsure about whether a participant prefers good A to good B, for example, we are in the realm of multi-parameter mechanism...
متن کاملCS364A: Algorithmic Game Theory Lecture #14: Robust Price-of-Anarchy Bounds in Smooth Games∗
2. The k inequalities that bound individuals’ equilibrium costs are summed over the players. The left-hand side of the resulting inequality is the cost of the PNE s; the right-hand side is a strange entangled function of s and s∗ (involving terms of the form fef ∗ e ). 3. The hardest step is to relate the entangled term ∑k i=1Ci(si ∗, s−i) generated by the previous step to the only two quantiti...
متن کاملCS364A: Algorithmic Game Theory Lecture #19: Pure Nash Equilibria and PLS-Completeness∗
1 The Big Picture We now have an impressive list of tractability results — polynomial-time algorithms and quickly converging learning dynamics — for several equilibrium concepts in several classes of games. Such tractability results, especially via reasonably natural learning processes, lend credibility to the predictive power of these equilibrium concepts. See also Figure 1. [Lecture 17] In ge...
متن کاملCS364A: Algorithmic Game Theory Lecture #5: Revenue-Maximizing Auctions∗
over all feasible outcomes (x1, . . . , xn) in some set X. Revenue is generated in welfaremaximizing auctions, but only as a side effect, a necessary evil to incentivize participants to report their private information. This lecture begins our discussion of auctions that are explicitly designed to raise as much revenue as possible. We started with the welfare objective for several reasons. One ...
متن کامل