Showing 1–50 of 62 results for author: Conitzer, V

Imperfect-Recall Games: Equilibrium Concepts and Their Complexity

Authors: Emanuel Tewolde, Brian Hu Zhang, Caspar Oesterheld, Manolis Zampetakis, Tuomas Sandholm, Paul W. Goldberg, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: We investigate optimal decision making under imperfect recall, that is, when an agent forgets information it once held before. An example is the absentminded driver game, as well as team games in which the members have limited communication capabilities. In the framework of extensive-form games with imperfect recall, we analyze the computational complexities of finding equilibria in multiplayer se… ▽ More We investigate optimal decision making under imperfect recall, that is, when an agent forgets information it once held before. An example is the absentminded driver game, as well as team games in which the members have limited communication capabilities. In the framework of extensive-form games with imperfect recall, we analyze the computational complexities of finding equilibria in multiplayer settings across three different solution concepts: Nash, multiselves based on evidential decision theory (EDT), and multiselves based on causal decision theory (CDT). We are interested in both exact and approximate solution computation. As special cases, we consider (1) single-player games, (2) two-player zero-sum games and relationships to maximin values, and (3) games without exogenous stochasticity (chance nodes). We relate these problems to the complexity classes P, PPAD, PLS, $Σ_2^P$ , $\exists$R, and $\exists \forall$R. △ Less

Submitted 22 June, 2024; originally announced June 2024.

Comments: Long version of the paper that got accepted to the Thirty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2024). 35 pages, 10 figures, 1 table

MSC Class: 91A05; 91A06; 91A10; 91A11; 91A18; 91A35; 91A68; 68T37; 68Q17; 68Q25 ACM Class: I.2; J.4; F.2

Computing Optimal Equilibria in Repeated Games with Restarts

Authors: Ratip Emin Berker, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: Infinitely repeated games can support cooperative outcomes that are not equilibria in the one-shot game. The idea is to make sure that any gains from deviating will be offset by retaliation in future rounds. However, this model of cooperation fails in anonymous settings with many strategic agents that interact in pairs. Here, a player can defect and then avoid penalization by immediately switching… ▽ More Infinitely repeated games can support cooperative outcomes that are not equilibria in the one-shot game. The idea is to make sure that any gains from deviating will be offset by retaliation in future rounds. However, this model of cooperation fails in anonymous settings with many strategic agents that interact in pairs. Here, a player can defect and then avoid penalization by immediately switching partners. In this paper, we focus on a specific set of equilibria that avoids this pitfall. In them, agents follow a designated sequence of actions, and restart if their opponent ever deviates. We show that the socially-optimal sequence of actions consists of an infinitely repeating goal value, preceded by a hazing period. We introduce an equivalence relation on sequences and prove that the computational problem of finding a representative from the optimal equivalence class is (weakly) NP-hard. Nevertheless, we present a pseudo-polynomial time dynamic program for this problem, as well as an integer linear program, and show they are efficient in practice. Lastly, we introduce a fully polynomial-time approximation scheme that outputs a hazing sequence with arbitrarily small approximation ratio. △ Less

Submitted 2 June, 2024; originally announced June 2024.

Comments: 13 pages, 2 figures, main body to be published in Proceedings of the Thirty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-24), Jeju, South Korea, 2024

ACM Class: F.2.m; I.2.m

Social Choice Should Guide AI Alignment in Dealing with Diverse Human Feedback

Authors: Vincent Conitzer, Rachel Freedman, Jobst Heitzig, Wesley H. Holliday, Bob M. Jacobs, Nathan Lambert, Milan Mossé, Eric Pacuit, Stuart Russell, Hailey Schoelkopf, Emanuel Tewolde, William S. Zwicker

Abstract: Foundation models such as GPT-4 are fine-tuned to avoid unsafe or otherwise problematic behavior, such as hel** to commit crimes or producing racist text. One approach to fine-tuning, called reinforcement learning from human feedback, learns from humans' expressed preferences over multiple outputs. Another approach is constitutional AI, in which the input from humans is a list of high-level prin… ▽ More Foundation models such as GPT-4 are fine-tuned to avoid unsafe or otherwise problematic behavior, such as hel** to commit crimes or producing racist text. One approach to fine-tuning, called reinforcement learning from human feedback, learns from humans' expressed preferences over multiple outputs. Another approach is constitutional AI, in which the input from humans is a list of high-level principles. But how do we deal with potentially diverging input from humans? How can we aggregate the input into consistent data about "collective" preferences or otherwise use it to make collective choices about model behavior? In this paper, we argue that the field of social choice is well positioned to address these questions, and we discuss ways forward for this agenda, drawing on discussions in a recent workshop on Social Choice for AI Ethics and Safety held in Berkeley, CA, USA in December 2023. △ Less

Submitted 4 June, 2024; v1 submitted 15 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

Comments: 15 pages, 4 figures

MSC Class: 68T01; 68T50; 91B14; 91B12 ACM Class: I.2.0; I.2.7; K.4.2; I.2.m; J.4

Now, Later, and Lasting: Ten Priorities for AI Research, Policy, and Practice

Authors: Eric Horvitz, Vincent Conitzer, Sheila McIlraith, Peter Stone

Abstract: Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) will transform many aspects of our lives and society, bringing immense opportunities but also posing significant risks and challenges. The next several decades may well be a turning point for humanity, comparable to the industrial revolution. We write to share a set of recommendations for moving forward from the perspective of the founder and leaders of the… ▽ More Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) will transform many aspects of our lives and society, bringing immense opportunities but also posing significant risks and challenges. The next several decades may well be a turning point for humanity, comparable to the industrial revolution. We write to share a set of recommendations for moving forward from the perspective of the founder and leaders of the One Hundred Year Study on AI. Launched a decade ago, the project is committed to a perpetual series of studies by multidisciplinary experts to evaluate the immediate, longer-term, and far-reaching effects of AI on people and society, and to make recommendations about AI research, policy, and practice. As we witness new capabilities emerging from neural models, it is crucial that we engage in efforts to advance our scientific understanding of these models and their behaviors. We must address the impact of AI on people and society through technical, social, and sociotechnical lenses, incorporating insights from a diverse range of experts including voices from engineering, social, behavioral, and economic disciplines. By fostering dialogue, collaboration, and action among various stakeholders, we can strategically guide the development and deployment of AI in ways that maximize its potential for contributing to human flourishing. Despite the growing divide in the field between focusing on short-term versus long-term implications, we think both are of critical importance. As Alan Turing, one of the pioneers of AI, wrote in 1950, "We can only see a short distance ahead, but we can see plenty there that needs to be done." We offer ten recommendations for action that collectively address both the short- and long-term potential impacts of AI technologies. △ Less

Submitted 20 April, 2024; v1 submitted 6 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

Comments: Four pages. To appear in Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery (CACM), June 2024

Recursive Joint Simulation in Games

Authors: Vojtech Kovarik, Caspar Oesterheld, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: Game-theoretic dynamics between AI agents could differ from traditional human-human interactions in various ways. One such difference is that it may be possible to accurately simulate an AI agent, for example because its source code is known. Our aim is to explore ways of leveraging this possibility to achieve more cooperative outcomes in strategic settings. In this paper, we study an interaction… ▽ More Game-theoretic dynamics between AI agents could differ from traditional human-human interactions in various ways. One such difference is that it may be possible to accurately simulate an AI agent, for example because its source code is known. Our aim is to explore ways of leveraging this possibility to achieve more cooperative outcomes in strategic settings. In this paper, we study an interaction between AI agents where the agents run a recursive joint simulation. That is, the agents first jointly observe a simulation of the situation they face. This simulation in turn recursively includes additional simulations (with a small chance of failure, to avoid infinite recursion), and the results of all these nested simulations are observed before an action is chosen. We show that the resulting interaction is strategically equivalent to an infinitely repeated version of the original game, allowing a direct transfer of existing results such as the various folk theorems. △ Less

Submitted 1 March, 2024; v1 submitted 12 February, 2024; originally announced February 2024.

Non-Excludable Bilateral Trade Between Groups

Authors: Yixuan Even Xu, Hanrui Zhang, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: Bilateral trade is one of the most natural and important forms of economic interaction: A seller has a single, indivisible item for sale, and a buyer is potentially interested. The two parties typically have different, privately known valuations for the item, and ideally, they would like to trade if the buyer values the item more than the seller. The celebrated impossibility result by Myerson and… ▽ More Bilateral trade is one of the most natural and important forms of economic interaction: A seller has a single, indivisible item for sale, and a buyer is potentially interested. The two parties typically have different, privately known valuations for the item, and ideally, they would like to trade if the buyer values the item more than the seller. The celebrated impossibility result by Myerson and Satterthwaite shows that any mechanism for this setting must violate at least one important desideratum. In this paper, we investigate a richer paradigm of bilateral trade, with many self-interested buyers and sellers on both sides of a single trade who cannot be excluded from the trade. We show that this allows for more positive results. In fact, we establish a dichotomy in the possibility of trading efficiently. If in expectation, the buyers value the item more, we can achieve efficiency in the limit. If this is not the case, then efficiency cannot be achieved in general. En route, we characterize trading mechanisms that encourage truth-telling, which may be of independent interest. We also evaluate our trading mechanisms experimentally, and the experiments align with our theoretical results. △ Less

Submitted 18 December, 2023; originally announced December 2023.

Comments: 14 pages, 2 figures, 1 table, aaai 2024

Testing for Reviewer Anchoring in Peer Review: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Authors: Ryan Liu, Steven Jecmen, Vincent Conitzer, Fei Fang, Nihar B. Shah

Abstract: Peer review frequently follows a process where reviewers first provide initial reviews, authors respond to these reviews, then reviewers update their reviews based on the authors' response. There is mixed evidence regarding whether this process is useful, including frequent anecdotal complaints that reviewers insufficiently update their scores. In this study, we aim to investigate whether reviewer… ▽ More Peer review frequently follows a process where reviewers first provide initial reviews, authors respond to these reviews, then reviewers update their reviews based on the authors' response. There is mixed evidence regarding whether this process is useful, including frequent anecdotal complaints that reviewers insufficiently update their scores. In this study, we aim to investigate whether reviewers anchor to their original scores when updating their reviews, which serves as a potential explanation for the lack of updates in reviewer scores. We design a novel randomized controlled trial to test if reviewers exhibit anchoring. In the experimental condition, participants initially see a flawed version of a paper that is later corrected, while in the control condition, participants only see the correct version. We take various measures to ensure that in the absence of anchoring, reviewers in the experimental group should revise their scores to be identically distributed to the scores from the control group. Furthermore, we construct the reviewed paper to maximize the difference between the flawed and corrected versions, and employ deception to hide the true experiment purpose. Our randomized controlled trial consists of 108 researchers as participants. First, we find that our intervention was successful at creating a difference in perceived paper quality between the flawed and corrected versions: Using a permutation test with the Mann-Whitney U statistic, we find that the experimental group's initial scores are lower than the control group's scores in both the Evaluation category (Vargha-Delaney A=0.64, p=0.0096) and Overall score (A=0.59, p=0.058). Next, we test for anchoring by comparing the experimental group's revised scores with the control group's scores. We find no significant evidence of anchoring in either the Overall (A=0.50, p=0.61) or Evaluation category (A=0.49, p=0.61). △ Less

Submitted 11 July, 2023; originally announced July 2023.

Comments: 14 pages (19 including references and appendix), 2 figures

A Theory of Bounded Inductive Rationality

Authors: Caspar Oesterheld, Abram Demski, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: The dominant theories of rational choice assume logical omniscience. That is, they assume that when facing a decision problem, an agent can perform all relevant computations and determine the truth value of all relevant logical/mathematical claims. This assumption is unrealistic when, for example, we offer bets on remote digits of pi or when an agent faces a computationally intractable planning pr… ▽ More The dominant theories of rational choice assume logical omniscience. That is, they assume that when facing a decision problem, an agent can perform all relevant computations and determine the truth value of all relevant logical/mathematical claims. This assumption is unrealistic when, for example, we offer bets on remote digits of pi or when an agent faces a computationally intractable planning problem. Furthermore, the assumption of logical omniscience creates contradictions in cases where the environment can contain descriptions of the agent itself. Importantly, strategic interactions as studied in game theory are decision problems in which a rational agent is predicted by its environment (the other players). In this paper, we develop a theory of rational decision making that does not assume logical omniscience. We consider agents who repeatedly face decision problems (including ones like betting on digits of pi or games against other agents). The main contribution of this paper is to provide a sensible theory of rationality for such agents. Roughly, we require that a boundedly rational inductive agent tests each efficiently computable hypothesis infinitely often and follows those hypotheses that keep their promises of high rewards. We then prove that agents that are rational in this sense have other desirable properties. For example, they learn to value random and pseudo-random lotteries at their expected reward. Finally, we consider strategic interactions between different agents and prove a folk theorem for what strategies bounded rational inductive agents can converge to. △ Less

Submitted 11 July, 2023; originally announced July 2023.

Comments: In Proceedings TARK 2023, arXiv:2307.04005

ACM Class: I.2

Journal ref: EPTCS 379, 2023, pp. 421-440

Steering No-Regret Learners to a Desired Equilibrium

Authors: Brian Hu Zhang, Gabriele Farina, Ioannis Anagnostides, Federico Cacciamani, Stephen Marcus McAleer, Andreas Alexander Haupt, Andrea Celli, Nicola Gatti, Vincent Conitzer, Tuomas Sandholm

Abstract: A mediator observes no-regret learners playing an extensive-form game repeatedly across $T$ rounds. The mediator attempts to steer players toward some desirable predetermined equilibrium by giving (nonnegative) payments to players. We call this the steering problem. The steering problem captures problems several problems of interest, among them equilibrium selection and information design (persuas… ▽ More A mediator observes no-regret learners playing an extensive-form game repeatedly across $T$ rounds. The mediator attempts to steer players toward some desirable predetermined equilibrium by giving (nonnegative) payments to players. We call this the steering problem. The steering problem captures problems several problems of interest, among them equilibrium selection and information design (persuasion). If the mediator's budget is unbounded, steering is trivial because the mediator can simply pay the players to play desirable actions. We study two bounds on the mediator's payments: a total budget and a per-round budget. If the mediator's total budget does not grow with $T$, we show that steering is impossible. However, we show that it is enough for the total budget to grow sublinearly with $T$, that is, for the average payment to vanish. When players' full strategies are observed at each round, we show that constant per-round budgets permit steering. In the more challenging setting where only trajectories through the game tree are observable, we show that steering is impossible with constant per-round budgets in general extensive-form games, but possible in normal-form games or if the per-round budget may itself depend on $T$. We also show how our results can be generalized to the case when the equilibrium is being computed online while steering is happening. We supplement our theoretical positive results with experiments highlighting the efficacy of steering in large games. △ Less

Submitted 17 February, 2024; v1 submitted 8 June, 2023; originally announced June 2023.

Computing Optimal Equilibria and Mechanisms via Learning in Zero-Sum Extensive-Form Games

Authors: Brian Hu Zhang, Gabriele Farina, Ioannis Anagnostides, Federico Cacciamani, Stephen Marcus McAleer, Andreas Alexander Haupt, Andrea Celli, Nicola Gatti, Vincent Conitzer, Tuomas Sandholm

Abstract: We introduce a new approach for computing optimal equilibria via learning in games. It applies to extensive-form settings with any number of players, including mechanism design, information design, and solution concepts such as correlated, communication, and certification equilibria. We observe that optimal equilibria are minimax equilibrium strategies of a player in an extensive-form zero-sum gam… ▽ More We introduce a new approach for computing optimal equilibria via learning in games. It applies to extensive-form settings with any number of players, including mechanism design, information design, and solution concepts such as correlated, communication, and certification equilibria. We observe that optimal equilibria are minimax equilibrium strategies of a player in an extensive-form zero-sum game. This reformulation allows to apply techniques for learning in zero-sum games, yielding the first learning dynamics that converge to optimal equilibria, not only in empirical averages, but also in iterates. We demonstrate the practical scalability and flexibility of our approach by attaining state-of-the-art performance in benchmark tabular games, and by computing an optimal mechanism for a sequential auction design problem using deep reinforcement learning. △ Less

Submitted 23 May, 2024; v1 submitted 8 June, 2023; originally announced June 2023.

The Computational Complexity of Single-Player Imperfect-Recall Games

Authors: Emanuel Tewolde, Caspar Oesterheld, Vincent Conitzer, Paul W. Goldberg

Abstract: We study single-player extensive-form games with imperfect recall, such as the Slee** Beauty problem or the Absentminded Driver game. For such games, two natural equilibrium concepts have been proposed as alternative solution concepts to ex-ante optimality. One equilibrium concept uses generalized double halving (GDH) as a belief system and evidential decision theory (EDT), and another one uses… ▽ More We study single-player extensive-form games with imperfect recall, such as the Slee** Beauty problem or the Absentminded Driver game. For such games, two natural equilibrium concepts have been proposed as alternative solution concepts to ex-ante optimality. One equilibrium concept uses generalized double halving (GDH) as a belief system and evidential decision theory (EDT), and another one uses generalized thirding (GT) as a belief system and causal decision theory (CDT). Our findings relate those three solution concepts of a game to solution concepts of a polynomial maximization problem: global optima, optimal points with respect to subsets of variables and Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) points. Based on these correspondences, we are able to settle various complexity-theoretic questions on the computation of such strategies. For ex-ante optimality and (EDT,GDH)-equilibria, we obtain NP-hardness and inapproximability, and for (CDT,GT)-equilibria we obtain CLS-completeness results. △ Less

Submitted 28 May, 2023; originally announced May 2023.

Comments: Long version of the paper that got accepted to the Thirty-Second International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-23). 10 pages and 2 figures in the main body. 17 pages and 4 figures in the appendix

MSC Class: 91A18; 68T37; 68Q17; 91A35 ACM Class: I.2; J.4; F.2

Game Theory with Simulation of Other Players

Authors: Vojtech Kovarik, Caspar Oesterheld, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: Game-theoretic interactions with AI agents could differ from traditional human-human interactions in various ways. One such difference is that it may be possible to simulate an AI agent (for example because its source code is known), which allows others to accurately predict the agent's actions. This could lower the bar for trust and cooperation. In this paper, we formalize games in which one play… ▽ More Game-theoretic interactions with AI agents could differ from traditional human-human interactions in various ways. One such difference is that it may be possible to simulate an AI agent (for example because its source code is known), which allows others to accurately predict the agent's actions. This could lower the bar for trust and cooperation. In this paper, we formalize games in which one player can simulate another at a cost. We first derive some basic properties of such games and then prove a number of results for them, including: (1) introducing simulation into generic-payoff normal-form games makes them easier to solve; (2) if the only obstacle to cooperation is a lack of trust in the possibly-simulated agent, simulation enables equilibria that improve the outcome for both agents; and however (3) there are settings where introducing simulation results in strictly worse outcomes for both players. △ Less

Submitted 19 March, 2024; v1 submitted 18 May, 2023; originally announced May 2023.

Comments: The latest version fixes some typos in the proof of Theorem 5

Similarity-based cooperative equilibrium

Authors: Caspar Oesterheld, Johannes Treutlein, Roger Grosse, Vincent Conitzer, Jakob Foerster

Abstract: As machine learning agents act more autonomously in the world, they will increasingly interact with each other. Unfortunately, in many social dilemmas like the one-shot Prisoner's Dilemma, standard game theory predicts that ML agents will fail to cooperate with each other. Prior work has shown that one way to enable cooperative outcomes in the one-shot Prisoner's Dilemma is to make the agents mutu… ▽ More As machine learning agents act more autonomously in the world, they will increasingly interact with each other. Unfortunately, in many social dilemmas like the one-shot Prisoner's Dilemma, standard game theory predicts that ML agents will fail to cooperate with each other. Prior work has shown that one way to enable cooperative outcomes in the one-shot Prisoner's Dilemma is to make the agents mutually transparent to each other, i.e., to allow them to access one another's source code (Rubinstein 1998, Tennenholtz 2004) -- or weights in the case of ML agents. However, full transparency is often unrealistic, whereas partial transparency is commonplace. Moreover, it is challenging for agents to learn their way to cooperation in the full transparency setting. In this paper, we introduce a more realistic setting in which agents only observe a single number indicating how similar they are to each other. We prove that this allows for the same set of cooperative outcomes as the full transparency setting. We also demonstrate experimentally that cooperation can be learned using simple ML methods. △ Less

Submitted 12 November, 2023; v1 submitted 25 November, 2022; originally announced November 2022.

Comments: Published at NeurIPS 2023. 32 pages, 9 figures

MSC Class: 91A10 (Primary) 91A05 91A26 91A35 (Secondary) ACM Class: I.2.11

Tradeoffs in Preventing Manipulation in Paper Bidding for Reviewer Assignment

Authors: Steven Jecmen, Nihar B. Shah, Fei Fang, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: Many conferences rely on paper bidding as a key component of their reviewer assignment procedure. These bids are then taken into account when assigning reviewers to help ensure that each reviewer is assigned to suitable papers. However, despite the benefits of using bids, reliance on paper bidding can allow malicious reviewers to manipulate the paper assignment for unethical purposes (e.g., gettin… ▽ More Many conferences rely on paper bidding as a key component of their reviewer assignment procedure. These bids are then taken into account when assigning reviewers to help ensure that each reviewer is assigned to suitable papers. However, despite the benefits of using bids, reliance on paper bidding can allow malicious reviewers to manipulate the paper assignment for unethical purposes (e.g., getting assigned to a friend's paper). Several different approaches to preventing this manipulation have been proposed and deployed. In this paper, we enumerate certain desirable properties that algorithms for addressing bid manipulation should satisfy. We then offer a high-level analysis of various approaches along with directions for future investigation. △ Less

Submitted 22 July, 2022; originally announced July 2022.

For Learning in Symmetric Teams, Local Optima are Global Nash Equilibria

Authors: Scott Emmons, Caspar Oesterheld, Andrew Critch, Vincent Conitzer, Stuart Russell

Abstract: Although it has been known since the 1970s that a globally optimal strategy profile in a common-payoff game is a Nash equilibrium, global optimality is a strict requirement that limits the result's applicability. In this work, we show that any locally optimal symmetric strategy profile is also a (global) Nash equilibrium. Furthermore, we show that this result is robust to perturbations to the comm… ▽ More Although it has been known since the 1970s that a globally optimal strategy profile in a common-payoff game is a Nash equilibrium, global optimality is a strict requirement that limits the result's applicability. In this work, we show that any locally optimal symmetric strategy profile is also a (global) Nash equilibrium. Furthermore, we show that this result is robust to perturbations to the common payoff and to the local optimum. Applied to machine learning, our result provides a global guarantee for any gradient method that finds a local optimum in symmetric strategy space. While this result indicates stability to unilateral deviation, we nevertheless identify broad classes of games where mixed local optima are unstable under joint, asymmetric deviations. We analyze the prevalence of instability by running learning algorithms in a suite of symmetric games, and we conclude by discussing the applicability of our results to multi-agent RL, cooperative inverse RL, and decentralized POMDPs. △ Less

Submitted 7 July, 2022; originally announced July 2022.

A Dataset on Malicious Paper Bidding in Peer Review

Authors: Steven Jecmen, Minji Yoon, Vincent Conitzer, Nihar B. Shah, Fei Fang

Abstract: In conference peer review, reviewers are often asked to provide "bids" on each submitted paper that express their interest in reviewing that paper. A paper assignment algorithm then uses these bids (along with other data) to compute a high-quality assignment of reviewers to papers. However, this process has been exploited by malicious reviewers who strategically bid in order to unethically manipul… ▽ More In conference peer review, reviewers are often asked to provide "bids" on each submitted paper that express their interest in reviewing that paper. A paper assignment algorithm then uses these bids (along with other data) to compute a high-quality assignment of reviewers to papers. However, this process has been exploited by malicious reviewers who strategically bid in order to unethically manipulate the paper assignment, crucially undermining the peer review process. For example, these reviewers may aim to get assigned to a friend's paper as part of a quid-pro-quo deal. A critical impediment towards creating and evaluating methods to mitigate this issue is the lack of any publicly-available data on malicious paper bidding. In this work, we collect and publicly release a novel dataset to fill this gap, collected from a mock conference activity where participants were instructed to bid either honestly or maliciously. We further provide a descriptive analysis of the bidding behavior, including our categorization of different strategies employed by participants. Finally, we evaluate the ability of each strategy to manipulate the assignment, and also evaluate the performance of some simple algorithms meant to detect malicious bidding. The performance of these detection algorithms can be taken as a baseline for future research on detecting malicious bidding. △ Less

Submitted 10 March, 2023; v1 submitted 24 June, 2022; originally announced July 2022.

Efficient Algorithms for Planning with Participation Constraints

Authors: Hanrui Zhang, Yu Cheng, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: We consider the problem of planning with participation constraints introduced in [Zhang et al., 2022]. In this problem, a principal chooses actions in a Markov decision process, resulting in separate utilities for the principal and the agent. However, the agent can and will choose to end the process whenever his expected onward utility becomes negative. The principal seeks to compute and commit to… ▽ More We consider the problem of planning with participation constraints introduced in [Zhang et al., 2022]. In this problem, a principal chooses actions in a Markov decision process, resulting in separate utilities for the principal and the agent. However, the agent can and will choose to end the process whenever his expected onward utility becomes negative. The principal seeks to compute and commit to a policy that maximizes her expected utility, under the constraint that the agent should always want to continue participating. We provide the first polynomial-time exact algorithm for this problem for finite-horizon settings, where previously only an additive $\varepsilon$-approximation algorithm was known. Our approach can also be extended to the (discounted) infinite-horizon case, for which we give an algorithm that runs in time polynomial in the size of the input and $\log(1/\varepsilon)$, and returns a policy that is optimal up to an additive error of $\varepsilon$. △ Less

Submitted 16 May, 2022; originally announced May 2022.

Comments: EC 2022

Game Transformations That Preserve Nash Equilibria or Best-Response Sets

Authors: Emanuel Tewolde, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: In this paper, we investigate under which conditions normal-form games are (guaranteed to be) strategically equivalent. First, we show for N-player games (N >= 3) that (A) it is NP-hard to decide whether a given strategy is a best response to some strategy profile of the opponents, and that (B) it is co-NP-hard to decide whether two games have the same best-response sets. Combining that with… ▽ More In this paper, we investigate under which conditions normal-form games are (guaranteed to be) strategically equivalent. First, we show for N-player games (N >= 3) that (A) it is NP-hard to decide whether a given strategy is a best response to some strategy profile of the opponents, and that (B) it is co-NP-hard to decide whether two games have the same best-response sets. Combining that with known results from the literature, we move our attention to equivalence-preserving game transformations. It is a widely used fact that a positive affine (linear) transformation of the utility payoffs neither changes the best-response sets nor the Nash equilibrium set. We investigate which other game transformations also possess either of the following two properties when being applied to an arbitrary N-player game (N >= 2): (i) The Nash equilibrium set stays the same; (ii) The best-response sets stay the same. For game transformations that operate player-wise and strategy-wise, we prove that (i) implies (ii) and that transformations with property (ii) must be positive affine. The resulting equivalence chain highlights the special status of positive affine transformations among all the transformation procedures that preserve key game-theoretic characteristics. △ Less

Submitted 22 June, 2024; v1 submitted 29 October, 2021; originally announced November 2021.

Comments: Long version of the paper that got accepted to the Thirty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2024). 28 pages, 1 figures

MSC Class: 91A10 (Primary); 91A06 (Secondary) ACM Class: J.4

Near-Optimal Reviewer Splitting in Two-Phase Paper Reviewing and Conference Experiment Design

Authors: Steven Jecmen, Hanrui Zhang, Ryan Liu, Fei Fang, Vincent Conitzer, Nihar B. Shah

Abstract: Many scientific conferences employ a two-phase paper review process, where some papers are assigned additional reviewers after the initial reviews are submitted. Many conferences also design and run experiments on their paper review process, where some papers are assigned reviewers who provide reviews under an experimental condition. In this paper, we consider the question: how should reviewers be… ▽ More Many scientific conferences employ a two-phase paper review process, where some papers are assigned additional reviewers after the initial reviews are submitted. Many conferences also design and run experiments on their paper review process, where some papers are assigned reviewers who provide reviews under an experimental condition. In this paper, we consider the question: how should reviewers be divided between phases or conditions in order to maximize total assignment similarity? We make several contributions towards answering this question. First, we prove that when the set of papers requiring additional review is unknown, a simplified variant of this problem is NP-hard. Second, we empirically show that across several datasets pertaining to real conference data, dividing reviewers between phases/conditions uniformly at random allows an assignment that is nearly as good as the oracle optimal assignment. This uniformly random choice is practical for both the two-phase and conference experiment design settings. Third, we provide explanations of this phenomenon by providing theoretical bounds on the suboptimality of this random strategy under certain natural conditions. From these easily-interpretable conditions, we provide actionable insights to conference program chairs about whether a random reviewer split is suitable for their conference. △ Less

Submitted 13 August, 2021; originally announced August 2021.

Automated Dynamic Mechanism Design

Authors: Hanrui Zhang, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: We study Bayesian automated mechanism design in unstructured dynamic environments, where a principal repeatedly interacts with an agent, and takes actions based on the strategic agent's report of the current state of the world. Both the principal and the agent can have arbitrary and potentially different valuations for the actions taken, possibly also depending on the actual state of the world. Mo… ▽ More We study Bayesian automated mechanism design in unstructured dynamic environments, where a principal repeatedly interacts with an agent, and takes actions based on the strategic agent's report of the current state of the world. Both the principal and the agent can have arbitrary and potentially different valuations for the actions taken, possibly also depending on the actual state of the world. Moreover, at any time, the state of the world may evolve arbitrarily depending on the action taken by the principal. The goal is to compute an optimal mechanism which maximizes the principal's utility in the face of the self-interested strategic agent. We give an efficient algorithm for computing optimal mechanisms, with or without payments, under different individual-rationality constraints, when the time horizon is constant. Our algorithm is based on a sophisticated linear program formulation, which can be customized in various ways to accommodate richer constraints. For environments with large time horizons, we show that the principal's optimal utility is hard to approximate within a certain constant factor, complementing our algorithmic result. We further consider a special case of the problem where the agent is myopic, and give a refined efficient algorithm whose time complexity scales linearly in the time horizon. Moreover, we show that memoryless mechanisms do not provide a good solution for our problem, in terms of both optimality and computational tractability. These results paint a relatively complete picture for automated dynamic mechanism design in unstructured environments. Finally, we present experimental results where our algorithms are applied to synthetic dynamic environments with different characteristics, which not only serve as a proof of concept for our algorithms, but also exhibit intriguing phenomena in dynamic mechanism design. △ Less

Submitted 12 May, 2021; originally announced May 2021.

Ethical Implementation of Artificial Intelligence to Select Embryos in In Vitro Fertilization

Authors: Michael Anis Mihdi Afnan, Cynthia Rudin, Vincent Conitzer, Julian Savulescu, Abhishek Mishra, Yanhe Liu, Masoud Afnan

Abstract: AI has the potential to revolutionize many areas of healthcare. Radiology, dermatology, and ophthalmology are some of the areas most likely to be impacted in the near future, and they have received significant attention from the broader research community. But AI techniques are now also starting to be used in in vitro fertilization (IVF), in particular for selecting which embryos to transfer to th… ▽ More AI has the potential to revolutionize many areas of healthcare. Radiology, dermatology, and ophthalmology are some of the areas most likely to be impacted in the near future, and they have received significant attention from the broader research community. But AI techniques are now also starting to be used in in vitro fertilization (IVF), in particular for selecting which embryos to transfer to the woman. The contribution of AI to IVF is potentially significant, but must be done carefully and transparently, as the ethical issues are significant, in part because this field involves creating new people. We first give a brief introduction to IVF and review the use of AI for embryo selection. We discuss concerns with the interpretation of the reported results from scientific and practical perspectives. We then consider the broader ethical issues involved. We discuss in detail the problems that result from the use of black-box methods in this context and advocate strongly for the use of interpretable models. Importantly, there have been no published trials of clinical effectiveness, a problem in both the AI and IVF communities, and we therefore argue that clinical implementation at this point would be premature. Finally, we discuss ways for the broader AI community to become involved to ensure scientifically sound and ethically responsible development of AI in IVF. △ Less

Submitted 30 April, 2021; originally announced May 2021.

Journal ref: AIES 2021

Computing Possible and Necessary Equilibrium Actions (and Bipartisan Set Winners)

Authors: Markus Brill, Rupert Freeman, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: In many multiagent environments, a designer has some, but limited control over the game being played. In this paper, we formalize this by considering incompletely specified games, in which some entries of the payoff matrices can be chosen from a specified set. We show that it is NP-hard for the designer to make these choices optimally, even in zero-sum games. In fact, it is already intractable to… ▽ More In many multiagent environments, a designer has some, but limited control over the game being played. In this paper, we formalize this by considering incompletely specified games, in which some entries of the payoff matrices can be chosen from a specified set. We show that it is NP-hard for the designer to make these choices optimally, even in zero-sum games. In fact, it is already intractable to decide whether a given action is (potentially or necessarily) played in equilibrium. We also consider incompletely specified symmetric games in which all completions are required to be symmetric. Here, hardness holds even in weak tournament games (symmetric zero-sum games whose entries are all -1, 0, or 1) and in tournament games (symmetric zero-sum games whose non-diagonal entries are all -1 or 1). The latter result settles the complexity of the possible and necessary winner problems for a social-choice-theoretic solution concept known as the bipartisan set. We finally give a mixed-integer linear programming formulation for weak tournament games and evaluate it experimentally. △ Less

Submitted 29 April, 2021; originally announced April 2021.

Journal ref: Proceedings of the 30th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pages 418-424. AAAI Press, 2016

Automated Mechanism Design for Classification with Partial Verification

Authors: Hanrui Zhang, Yu Cheng, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: We study the problem of automated mechanism design with partial verification, where each type can (mis)report only a restricted set of types (rather than any other type), induced by the principal's limited verification power. We prove hardness results when the revelation principle does not necessarily hold, as well as when types have even minimally different preferences. In light of these hardness… ▽ More We study the problem of automated mechanism design with partial verification, where each type can (mis)report only a restricted set of types (rather than any other type), induced by the principal's limited verification power. We prove hardness results when the revelation principle does not necessarily hold, as well as when types have even minimally different preferences. In light of these hardness results, we focus on truthful mechanisms in the setting where all types share the same preference over outcomes, which is motivated by applications in, e.g., strategic classification. We present a number of algorithmic and structural results, including an efficient algorithm for finding optimal deterministic truthful mechanisms, which also implies a faster algorithm for finding optimal randomized truthful mechanisms via a characterization based on convexity. We then consider a more general setting, where the principal's cost is a function of the combination of outcomes assigned to each type. In particular, we focus on the case where the cost function is submodular, and give generalizations of essentially all our results in the classical setting where the cost function is additive. Our results provide a relatively complete picture for automated mechanism design with partial verification. △ Less

Submitted 11 April, 2021; originally announced April 2021.

Comments: AAAI'21

Classification with Strategically Withheld Data

Authors: Anilesh K. Krishnaswamy, Haoming Li, David Rein, Hanrui Zhang, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: Machine learning techniques can be useful in applications such as credit approval and college admission. However, to be classified more favorably in such contexts, an agent may decide to strategically withhold some of her features, such as bad test scores. This is a missing data problem with a twist: which data is missing {\em depends on the chosen classifier}, because the specific classifier is w… ▽ More Machine learning techniques can be useful in applications such as credit approval and college admission. However, to be classified more favorably in such contexts, an agent may decide to strategically withhold some of her features, such as bad test scores. This is a missing data problem with a twist: which data is missing {\em depends on the chosen classifier}, because the specific classifier is what may create the incentive to withhold certain feature values. We address the problem of training classifiers that are robust to this behavior. We design three classification methods: {\sc Mincut}, {\sc Hill-Climbing} ({\sc HC}) and Incentive-Compatible Logistic Regression ({\sc IC-LR}). We show that {\sc Mincut} is optimal when the true distribution of data is fully known. However, it can produce complex decision boundaries, and hence be prone to overfitting in some cases. Based on a characterization of truthful classifiers (i.e., those that give no incentive to strategically hide features), we devise a simpler alternative called {\sc HC} which consists of a hierarchical ensemble of out-of-the-box classifiers, trained using a specialized hill-climbing procedure which we show to be convergent. For several reasons, {\sc Mincut} and {\sc HC} are not effective in utilizing a large number of complementarily informative features. To this end, we present {\sc IC-LR}, a modification of Logistic Regression that removes the incentive to strategically drop features. We also show that our algorithms perform well in experiments on real-world data sets, and present insights into their relative performance in different settings. △ Less

Submitted 14 January, 2021; v1 submitted 18 December, 2020; originally announced December 2020.

Indecision Modeling

Authors: Duncan C McElfresh, Lok Chan, Kenzie Doyle, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Vincent Conitzer, Jana Schaich Borg, John P Dickerson

Abstract: AI systems are often used to make or contribute to important decisions in a growing range of applications, including criminal justice, hiring, and medicine. Since these decisions impact human lives, it is important that the AI systems act in ways which align with human values. Techniques for preference modeling and social choice help researchers learn and aggregate peoples' preferences, which are… ▽ More AI systems are often used to make or contribute to important decisions in a growing range of applications, including criminal justice, hiring, and medicine. Since these decisions impact human lives, it is important that the AI systems act in ways which align with human values. Techniques for preference modeling and social choice help researchers learn and aggregate peoples' preferences, which are used to guide AI behavior; thus, it is imperative that these learned preferences are accurate. These techniques often assume that people are willing to express strict preferences over alternatives; which is not true in practice. People are often indecisive, and especially so when their decision has moral implications. The philosophy and psychology literature shows that indecision is a measurable and nuanced behavior -- and that there are several different reasons people are indecisive. This complicates the task of both learning and aggregating preferences, since most of the relevant literature makes restrictive assumptions on the meaning of indecision. We begin to close this gap by formalizing several mathematical \emph{indecision} models based on theories from philosophy, psychology, and economics; these models can be used to describe (indecisive) agent decisions, both when they are allowed to express indecision and when they are not. We test these models using data collected from an online survey where participants choose how to (hypothetically) allocate organs to patients waiting for a transplant. △ Less

Submitted 12 March, 2021; v1 submitted 15 December, 2020; originally announced December 2020.

Comments: Accepted at AAAI 2020

ACM Class: I.2.0; J.4

Welfare-Preserving $\varepsilon$-BIC to BIC Transformation with Negligible Revenue Loss

Authors: Vincent Conitzer, Zhe Feng, David C. Parkes, Eric Sodomka

Abstract: In this paper, we provide a transform from an $\varepsilon$-BIC mechanism into an exactly BIC mechanism without any loss of social welfare and with additive and negligible revenue loss. This is the first $\varepsilon$-BIC to BIC transformation that preserves welfare and provides negligible revenue loss. The revenue loss bound is tight given the requirement to maintain social welfare. Previous… ▽ More In this paper, we provide a transform from an $\varepsilon$-BIC mechanism into an exactly BIC mechanism without any loss of social welfare and with additive and negligible revenue loss. This is the first $\varepsilon$-BIC to BIC transformation that preserves welfare and provides negligible revenue loss. The revenue loss bound is tight given the requirement to maintain social welfare. Previous $\varepsilon$-BIC to BIC transformations preserve social welfare but have no revenue guarantee~\citep{BeiHuang11}, or suffer welfare loss while incurring a revenue loss with both a multiplicative and an additive term, e.g.,~\citet{DasWeinberg12, Rubinstein18, Cai19}. The revenue loss achieved by our transformation is incomparable to these earlier approaches and can be significantly less. \newnew{Our approach is different from the previous replica-surrogate matching methods and we directly make use of a directed and weighted type graph (induced by the types' regret), one for each agent. The transformation runs a \emph{fractional rotation step} and a \emph{payment reducing step} iteratively to make the mechanism Bayesian incentive compatible.} We also analyze $\varepsilon$-expected ex-post IC ($\varepsilon$-EEIC) mechanisms~\citep{DuettingFJLLP12}. We provide a welfare-preserving transformation in this setting with the same revenue loss guarantee for uniform type distributions and give an impossibility result for non-uniform distributions. We apply the transform to linear-programming based and machine-learning based methods of automated mechanism design. △ Less

Submitted 2 August, 2021; v1 submitted 18 July, 2020; originally announced July 2020.

Mitigating Manipulation in Peer Review via Randomized Reviewer Assignments

Authors: Steven Jecmen, Hanrui Zhang, Ryan Liu, Nihar B. Shah, Vincent Conitzer, Fei Fang

Abstract: We consider three important challenges in conference peer review: (i) reviewers maliciously attempting to get assigned to certain papers to provide positive reviews, possibly as part of quid-pro-quo arrangements with the authors; (ii) "torpedo reviewing," where reviewers deliberately attempt to get assigned to certain papers that they dislike in order to reject them; (iii) reviewer de-anonymizatio… ▽ More We consider three important challenges in conference peer review: (i) reviewers maliciously attempting to get assigned to certain papers to provide positive reviews, possibly as part of quid-pro-quo arrangements with the authors; (ii) "torpedo reviewing," where reviewers deliberately attempt to get assigned to certain papers that they dislike in order to reject them; (iii) reviewer de-anonymization on release of the similarities and the reviewer-assignment code. On the conceptual front, we identify connections between these three problems and present a framework that brings all these challenges under a common umbrella. We then present a (randomized) algorithm for reviewer assignment that can optimally solve the reviewer-assignment problem under any given constraints on the probability of assignment for any reviewer-paper pair. We further consider the problem of restricting the joint probability that certain suspect pairs of reviewers are assigned to certain papers, and show that this problem is NP-hard for arbitrary constraints on these joint probabilities but efficiently solvable for a practical special case. Finally, we experimentally evaluate our algorithms on datasets from past conferences, where we observe that they can limit the chance that any malicious reviewer gets assigned to their desired paper to 50% while producing assignments with over 90% of the total optimal similarity. Our algorithms still achieve this similarity while also preventing reviewers with close associations from being assigned to the same paper. △ Less

Submitted 23 October, 2020; v1 submitted 29 June, 2020; originally announced June 2020.

Adapting a Kidney Exchange Algorithm to Align with Human Values

Authors: Rachel Freedman, Jana Schaich Borg, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, John P. Dickerson, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: The efficient and fair allocation of limited resources is a classical problem in economics and computer science. In kidney exchanges, a central market maker allocates living kidney donors to patients in need of an organ. Patients and donors in kidney exchanges are prioritized using ad-hoc weights decided on by committee and then fed into an allocation algorithm that determines who gets what--and w… ▽ More The efficient and fair allocation of limited resources is a classical problem in economics and computer science. In kidney exchanges, a central market maker allocates living kidney donors to patients in need of an organ. Patients and donors in kidney exchanges are prioritized using ad-hoc weights decided on by committee and then fed into an allocation algorithm that determines who gets what--and who does not. In this paper, we provide an end-to-end methodology for estimating weights of individual participant profiles in a kidney exchange. We first elicit from human subjects a list of patient attributes they consider acceptable for the purpose of prioritizing patients (e.g., medical characteristics, lifestyle choices, and so on). Then, we ask subjects comparison queries between patient profiles and estimate weights in a principled way from their responses. We show how to use these weights in kidney exchange market clearing algorithms. We then evaluate the impact of the weights in simulations and find that the precise numerical values of the weights we computed matter little, other than the ordering of profiles that they imply. However, compared to not prioritizing patients at all, there is a significant effect, with certain classes of patients being (de)prioritized based on the human-elicited value judgments. △ Less

Submitted 19 May, 2020; originally announced May 2020.

Journal ref: Artificial Intelligence 283 (2020) 103261

Artificial Artificial Intelligence: Measuring Influence of AI 'Assessments' on Moral Decision-Making

Authors: Lok Chan, Kenzie Doyle, Duncan McElfresh, Vincent Conitzer, John P. Dickerson, Jana Schaich Borg, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong

Abstract: Given AI's growing role in modeling and improving decision-making, how and when to present users with feedback is an urgent topic to address. We empirically examined the effect of feedback from false AI on moral decision-making about donor kidney allocation. We found some evidence that judgments about whether a patient should receive a kidney can be influenced by feedback about participants' own d… ▽ More Given AI's growing role in modeling and improving decision-making, how and when to present users with feedback is an urgent topic to address. We empirically examined the effect of feedback from false AI on moral decision-making about donor kidney allocation. We found some evidence that judgments about whether a patient should receive a kidney can be influenced by feedback about participants' own decision-making perceived to be given by AI, even if the feedback is entirely random. We also discovered different effects between assessments presented as being from human experts and assessments presented as being from AI. △ Less

Submitted 13 January, 2020; originally announced January 2020.

Journal ref: Proceedings of the 2020 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES '20)

Can Artificial Intelligence Do Everything That We Can?

Authors: Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: In this article, I discuss what AI can and cannot yet do, and the implications for humanity. In this article, I discuss what AI can and cannot yet do, and the implications for humanity. △ Less

Submitted 26 November, 2018; originally announced December 2018.

Comments: A shorter version appeared as "Natural Intelligence Still Has Its Advantages" in The Wall Street Journal on August 28, 2018

Pacing Equilibrium in First-Price Auction Markets

Authors: Vincent Conitzer, Christian Kroer, Debmalya Panigrahi, Okke Schrijvers, Eric Sodomka, Nicolas E. Stier-Moses, Chris Wilkens

Abstract: Mature internet advertising platforms offer high-level campaign management tools to help advertisers run their campaigns, often abstracting away the intricacies of how each ad is placed and focusing on aggregate metrics of interest to advertisers. On such platforms, advertisers often participate in auctions through a proxy bidder, so the standard incentive analyses that are common in the literatur… ▽ More Mature internet advertising platforms offer high-level campaign management tools to help advertisers run their campaigns, often abstracting away the intricacies of how each ad is placed and focusing on aggregate metrics of interest to advertisers. On such platforms, advertisers often participate in auctions through a proxy bidder, so the standard incentive analyses that are common in the literature do not apply directly. In this paper, we take the perspective of a budget management system that surfaces aggregated incentives -- instead of individual auctions -- and compare first and second price auctions. We show that theory offers surprising endorsement for using a first price auction to sell individual impressions. In particular, first price auctions guarantee uniqueness of the steady-state equilibrium of the budget management system, monotonicity, and other desirable properties, as well as efficient computation through the solution to the well-studied Eisenberg-Gale convex program. Contrary to what one can expect from first price auctions, we show that incentives issues are not a barrier that undermines the system. Using realistic instances generated from data collected at real-world auction platforms, we show that bidders have small regret with respect to their optimal ex-post strategy, and they do not have a big incentive to misreport when they can influence equilibria directly by giving inputs strategically. Finally, budget-constrained bidders, who have significant prevalence in real-world platforms, tend to have smaller regrets. Our computations indicate that bidder budgets, pacing multipliers and regrets all have a positive association in statistical terms. △ Less

Submitted 3 September, 2021; v1 submitted 17 November, 2018; originally announced November 2018.

Journal ref: Management Science (Forthcoming, 2021) and Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation. Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 587 (2019)

The Exact Computational Complexity of Evolutionarily Stable Strategies

Authors: Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: While the computational complexity of many game-theoretic solution concepts, notably Nash equilibrium, has now been settled, the question of determining the exact complexity of computing an evolutionarily stable strategy has resisted solution since attention was drawn to it in 2004. In this paper, I settle this question by proving that deciding the existence of an evolutionarily stable strategy is… ▽ More While the computational complexity of many game-theoretic solution concepts, notably Nash equilibrium, has now been settled, the question of determining the exact complexity of computing an evolutionarily stable strategy has resisted solution since attention was drawn to it in 2004. In this paper, I settle this question by proving that deciding the existence of an evolutionarily stable strategy is $Σ_2^P$-complete. △ Less

Submitted 6 May, 2018; originally announced May 2018.

Comments: Final version to appear in Mathematics of Operations Research

Complexity of Scheduling Charging in the Smart Grid

Authors: Mathijs de Weerdt, Michael Albert, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: In the smart grid, the intent is to use flexibility in demand, both to balance demand and supply as well as to resolve potential congestion. A first prominent example of such flexible demand is the charging of electric vehicles, which do not necessarily need to be charged as soon as they are plugged in. The problem of optimally scheduling the charging demand of electric vehicles within the constra… ▽ More In the smart grid, the intent is to use flexibility in demand, both to balance demand and supply as well as to resolve potential congestion. A first prominent example of such flexible demand is the charging of electric vehicles, which do not necessarily need to be charged as soon as they are plugged in. The problem of optimally scheduling the charging demand of electric vehicles within the constraints of the electricity infrastructure is called the charge scheduling problem. The models of the charging speed, horizon, and charging demand determine the computational complexity of the charge scheduling problem. For about 20 variants, we show, using a dynamic programming approach, that the problem is either in P or weakly NP-hard. We also show that about 10 variants of the problem are strongly NP-hard, presenting a potentially significant obstacle to their use in practical situations of scale. △ Less

Submitted 21 September, 2017; originally announced September 2017.

Multiplicative Pacing Equilibria in Auction Markets

Authors: Vincent Conitzer, Christian Kroer, Eric Sodomka, Nicolas E. Stier-Moses

Abstract: Budgets play a significant role in real-world sequential auction markets such as those implemented by internet companies. To maximize the value provided to auction participants, spending is smoothed across auctions so budgets are used for the best opportunities. Motivated by a mechanism used in practice by several companies, this paper considers a smoothing procedure that relies on {\em pacing mul… ▽ More Budgets play a significant role in real-world sequential auction markets such as those implemented by internet companies. To maximize the value provided to auction participants, spending is smoothed across auctions so budgets are used for the best opportunities. Motivated by a mechanism used in practice by several companies, this paper considers a smoothing procedure that relies on {\em pacing multipliers}: on behalf of each buyer, the auction market applies a factor between 0 and 1 that uniformly scales the bids across all auctions. Reinterpreting this process as a game between buyers, we introduce the notion of {\em pacing equilibrium}, and prove that they are always guaranteed to exist. We demonstrate through examples that a market can have multiple pacing equilibria with large variations in several natural objectives. We show that pacing equilibria refine another popular solution concept, competitive equilibria, and show further connections between the two solution concepts. Although we show that computing either a social-welfare-maximizing or a revenue-maximizing pacing equilibrium is NP-hard, we present a mixed-integer program (MIP) that can be used to find equilibria optimizing several relevant objectives. We use the MIP to provide evidence that: (1) equilibrium multiplicity occurs very rarely across several families of random instances, (2) static MIP solutions can be used to improve the outcomes achieved by a dynamic pacing algorithm with instances based on a real-world auction market, and (3) for the instances we study, buyers do not have an incentive to misreport bids or budgets provided there are enough participants in the auction. △ Less

Submitted 8 May, 2021; v1 submitted 21 June, 2017; originally announced June 2017.

Journal ref: Operations Research, Forthcoming, 2021

On Stackelberg Mixed Strategies

Authors: Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: It is sometimes the case that one solution concept in game theory is equivalent to applying another solution concept to a modified version of the game. In such cases, does it make sense to study the former separately (as it applies to the original representation of the game), or should we entirely subordinate it to the latter? The answer probably depends on the particular circumstances, and indeed… ▽ More It is sometimes the case that one solution concept in game theory is equivalent to applying another solution concept to a modified version of the game. In such cases, does it make sense to study the former separately (as it applies to the original representation of the game), or should we entirely subordinate it to the latter? The answer probably depends on the particular circumstances, and indeed the literature takes different approaches in different cases. In this article, I consider the specific example of Stackelberg mixed strategies. I argue that, even though a Stackelberg mixed strategy can also be seen as a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium of a corresponding extensive-form game, there remains significant value in studying it separately. The analysis of this special case may have implications for other solution concepts. △ Less

Submitted 21 May, 2017; originally announced May 2017.

Comments: This paper appears in Synthese, Volume 193, Issue 3, pp. 689-703, March 2016. The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-015-0927-6

Journal ref: Synthese, Volume 193, Issue 3, pp. 689-703, March 2016

Fair Public Decision Making

Authors: Vincent Conitzer, Rupert Freeman, Nisarg Shah

Abstract: We generalize the classic problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods to the problem of \emph{fair public decision making}, in which a decision must be made on several social issues simultaneously, and, unlike the classic setting, a decision can provide positive utility to multiple players. We extend the popular fairness notion of proportionality (which is not guaranteeable) to our more general… ▽ More We generalize the classic problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods to the problem of \emph{fair public decision making}, in which a decision must be made on several social issues simultaneously, and, unlike the classic setting, a decision can provide positive utility to multiple players. We extend the popular fairness notion of proportionality (which is not guaranteeable) to our more general setting, and introduce three novel relaxations --- \emph{proportionality up to one issue, round robin share, and pessimistic proportional share} --- that are also interesting in the classic goods allocation setting. We show that the Maximum Nash Welfare solution, which is known to satisfy appealing fairness properties in the classic setting, satisfies or approximates all three relaxations in our framework. We also provide polynomial time algorithms and hardness results for finding allocations satisfying these axioms, with or without insisting on Pareto optimality. △ Less

Submitted 31 May, 2017; v1 submitted 12 November, 2016; originally announced November 2016.

Computing Equilibria with Partial Commitment

Authors: Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: In security games, the solution concept commonly used is that of a Stackelberg equilibrium where the defender gets to commit to a mixed strategy. The motivation for this is that the attacker can repeatedly observe the defender's actions and learn her distribution over actions, before acting himself. If the actions were not observable, Nash (or perhaps correlated) equilibrium would arguably be a mo… ▽ More In security games, the solution concept commonly used is that of a Stackelberg equilibrium where the defender gets to commit to a mixed strategy. The motivation for this is that the attacker can repeatedly observe the defender's actions and learn her distribution over actions, before acting himself. If the actions were not observable, Nash (or perhaps correlated) equilibrium would arguably be a more natural solution concept. But what if some, but not all, aspects of the defender's actions are observable? In this paper, we introduce solution concepts corresponding to this case, both with and without correlation. We study their basic properties, whether these solutions can be efficiently computed, and the impact of additional observability on the utility obtained. △ Less

Submitted 13 October, 2016; originally announced October 2016.

Philosophy in the Face of Artificial Intelligence

Authors: Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: In this article, I discuss how the AI community views concerns about the emergence of superintelligent AI and related philosophical issues. In this article, I discuss how the AI community views concerns about the emergence of superintelligent AI and related philosophical issues. △ Less

Submitted 19 May, 2016; originally announced May 2016.

Comments: Prospect, May 4, 2016. http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/science-and-technology/artificial-intelligence-wheres-the-philosophical-scrutiny

Catcher-Evader Games

Authors: Yuqian Li, Vincent Conitzer, Dmytro Korzhyk

Abstract: Algorithms for computing game-theoretic solutions have recently been applied to a number of security domains. However, many of the techniques developed for compact representations of security games do not extend to {\em Bayesian} security games, which allow us to model uncertainty about the attacker's type. In this paper, we introduce a general framework of {\em catcher-evader} games that can capt… ▽ More Algorithms for computing game-theoretic solutions have recently been applied to a number of security domains. However, many of the techniques developed for compact representations of security games do not extend to {\em Bayesian} security games, which allow us to model uncertainty about the attacker's type. In this paper, we introduce a general framework of {\em catcher-evader} games that can capture Bayesian security games as well as other game families of interest. We show that computing Stackelberg strategies is NP-hard, but give an algorithm for computing a Nash equilibrium that performs well in experiments. We also prove that the Nash equilibria of these games satisfy the {\em interchangeability} property, so that equilibrium selection is not an issue. △ Less

Submitted 15 April, 2016; v1 submitted 4 February, 2016; originally announced February 2016.

Timeability of Extensive-Form Games

Authors: Sune K. Jakobsen, Troels B. Sørensen, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: Extensive-form games constitute the standard representation scheme for games with a temporal component. But do all extensive-form games correspond to protocols that we can implement in the real world? We often rule out games with imperfect recall, which prescribe that an agent forget something that she knew before. In this paper, we show that even some games with perfect recall can be problematic… ▽ More Extensive-form games constitute the standard representation scheme for games with a temporal component. But do all extensive-form games correspond to protocols that we can implement in the real world? We often rule out games with imperfect recall, which prescribe that an agent forget something that she knew before. In this paper, we show that even some games with perfect recall can be problematic to implement. Specifically, we show that if the agents have a sense of time passing (say, access to a clock), then some extensive-form games can no longer be implemented; no matter how we attempt to time the game, some information will leak to the agents that they are not supposed to have. We say such a game is not exactly timeable. We provide easy-to-check necessary and sufficient conditions for a game to be exactly timeable. Most of the technical depth of the paper concerns how to approximately time games, which we show can always be done, though it may require large amounts of time. Specifically, we show that for some games the time required to approximately implement the game grows as a power tower of height proportional to the number of players and with a parameter that measures the precision of the approximation at the top of the power tower. In practice, that makes the games untimeable. Besides the conceptual contribution to game theory, we believe our methodology can have applications to preventing information leakage in security protocols. △ Less

Submitted 11 February, 2015; originally announced February 2015.

Comments: 28 pages, 2 figures

Complexity of Mechanism Design

Authors: Vincent Conitzer, Tuomas Sandholm

Abstract: The aggregation of conflicting preferences is a central problem in multiagent systems. The key difficulty is that the agents may report their preferences insincerely. Mechanism design is the art of designing the rules of the game so that the agents are motivated to report their preferences truthfully and a (socially) desirable outcome is chosen. We propose an approach where a mechanism is autom… ▽ More The aggregation of conflicting preferences is a central problem in multiagent systems. The key difficulty is that the agents may report their preferences insincerely. Mechanism design is the art of designing the rules of the game so that the agents are motivated to report their preferences truthfully and a (socially) desirable outcome is chosen. We propose an approach where a mechanism is automatically created for the preference aggregation setting at hand. This has several advantages, but the downside is that the mechanism design optimization problem needs to be solved anew each time. Focusing on settings where side payments are not possible, we show that the mechanism design problem is NP-complete for deterministic mechanisms. This holds both for dominant-strategy implementation and for Bayes-Nash implementation. We then show that if we allow randomized mechanisms, the mechanism design problem becomes tractable. In other words, the coordinator can tackle the computational complexity introduced by its uncertainty about the agents preferences BY making the agents face additional uncertainty.This comes at no loss, AND IN SOME cases at a gain, IN the(social) objective. △ Less

Submitted 7 August, 2014; originally announced August 2014.

Comments: Appears in Proceedings of the Eighteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI2002)

Report number: UAI-P-2002-PG-103-110

Justified Representation in Approval-Based Committee Voting

Authors: Haris Aziz, Markus Brill, Vincent Conitzer, Edith Elkind, Rupert Freeman, Toby Walsh

Abstract: We consider approval-based committee voting, i.e. the setting where each voter approves a subset of candidates, and these votes are then used to select a fixed-size set of winners (committee). We propose a natural axiom for this setting, which we call justified representation (JR). This axiom requires that if a large enough group of voters exhibits agreement by supporting the same candidate, then… ▽ More We consider approval-based committee voting, i.e. the setting where each voter approves a subset of candidates, and these votes are then used to select a fixed-size set of winners (committee). We propose a natural axiom for this setting, which we call justified representation (JR). This axiom requires that if a large enough group of voters exhibits agreement by supporting the same candidate, then at least one voter in this group has an approved candidate in the winning committee. We show that for every list of ballots it is possible to select a committee that provides JR. However, it turns out that several prominent approval-based voting rules may fail to output such a committee. In particular, while Proportional Approval Voting (PAV) always outputs a committee that provides JR, Reweighted Approval Voting (RAV), a tractable approximation to PAV, does not have this property. We then introduce a stronger version of the JR axiom, which we call extended justified representation (EJR), and show that PAV satisfies EJR, while other rules we consider do not; indeed, EJR can be used to characterize PAV within the class of weighted PAV rules. We also consider several other questions related to JR and EJR, including the relationship between JR/EJR and core stability, and the complexity of the associated algorithmic problems. △ Less

Submitted 11 September, 2016; v1 submitted 30 July, 2014; originally announced July 2014.

Comments: Preliminary version was presented at AAAI 2015

MSC Class: 91A12; 68Q15 ACM Class: J.4; I.2.11; F.2

Stackelberg vs. Nash in Security Games: An Extended Investigation of Interchangeability, Equivalence, and Uniqueness

Authors: Dmytro Korzhyk, Zhengyu Yin, Christopher Kiekintveld, Vincent Conitzer, Milind Tambe

Abstract: There has been significant recent interest in game-theoretic approaches to security, with much of the recent research focused on utilizing the leader-follower Stackelberg game model. Among the major applications are the ARMOR program deployed at LAX Airport and the IRIS program in use by the US Federal Air Marshals (FAMS). The foundational assumption for using Stackelberg games is that security fo… ▽ More There has been significant recent interest in game-theoretic approaches to security, with much of the recent research focused on utilizing the leader-follower Stackelberg game model. Among the major applications are the ARMOR program deployed at LAX Airport and the IRIS program in use by the US Federal Air Marshals (FAMS). The foundational assumption for using Stackelberg games is that security forces (leaders), acting first, commit to a randomized strategy; while their adversaries (followers) choose their best response after surveillance of this randomized strategy. Yet, in many situations, a leader may face uncertainty about the follower's surveillance capability. Previous work fails to address how a leader should compute her strategy given such uncertainty. We provide five contributions in the context of a general class of security games. First, we show that the Nash equilibria in security games are interchangeable, thus alleviating the equilibrium selection problem. Second, under a natural restriction on security games, any Stackelberg strategy is also a Nash equilibrium strategy; and furthermore, the solution is unique in a class of security games of which ARMOR is a key exemplar. Third, when faced with a follower that can attack multiple targets, many of these properties no longer hold. Fourth, we show experimentally that in most (but not all) games where the restriction does not hold, the Stackelberg strategy is still a Nash equilibrium strategy, but this is no longer true when the attacker can attack multiple targets. Finally, as a possible direction for future research, we propose an extensive-form game model that makes the defender's uncertainty about the attacker's ability to observe explicit. △ Less

Submitted 16 January, 2014; originally announced January 2014.

Journal ref: Journal Of Artificial Intelligence Research, Volume 41, pages 297-327, 2011

Determining Possible and Necessary Winners Given Partial Orders

Authors: Lirong Xia, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: Usually a voting rule requires agents to give their preferences as linear orders. However, in some cases it is impractical for an agent to give a linear order over all the alternatives. It has been suggested to let agents submit partial orders instead. Then, given a voting rule, a profile of partial orders, and an alternative (candidate) c, two important questions arise: first, is it still possibl… ▽ More Usually a voting rule requires agents to give their preferences as linear orders. However, in some cases it is impractical for an agent to give a linear order over all the alternatives. It has been suggested to let agents submit partial orders instead. Then, given a voting rule, a profile of partial orders, and an alternative (candidate) c, two important questions arise: first, is it still possible for c to win, and second, is c guaranteed to win? These are the possible winner and necessary winner problems, respectively. Each of these two problems is further divided into two sub-problems: determining whether c is a unique winner (that is, c is the only winner), or determining whether c is a co-winner (that is, c is in the set of winners). We consider the setting where the number of alternatives is unbounded and the votes are unweighted. We completely characterize the complexity of possible/necessary winner problems for the following common voting rules: a class of positional scoring rules (including Borda), Copeland, maximin, Bucklin, ranked pairs, voting trees, and plurality with runoff. △ Less

Submitted 16 January, 2014; originally announced January 2014.

Journal ref: Journal Of Artificial Intelligence Research, Volume 41, pages 25-67, 2011

Eliciting Single-Peaked Preferences Using Comparison Queries

Authors: Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: Voting is a general method for aggregating the preferences of multiple agents. Each agent ranks all the possible alternatives, and based on this, an aggregate ranking of the alternatives (or at least a winning alternative) is produced. However, when there are many alternatives, it is impractical to simply ask agents to report their complete preferences. Rather, the agents preferences, or at leas… ▽ More Voting is a general method for aggregating the preferences of multiple agents. Each agent ranks all the possible alternatives, and based on this, an aggregate ranking of the alternatives (or at least a winning alternative) is produced. However, when there are many alternatives, it is impractical to simply ask agents to report their complete preferences. Rather, the agents preferences, or at least the relevant parts thereof, need to be elicited. This is done by asking the agents a (hopefully small) number of simple queries about their preferences, such as comparison queries, which ask an agent to compare two of the alternatives. Prior work on preference elicitation in voting has focused on the case of unrestricted preferences. It has been shown that in this setting, it is sometimes necessary to ask each agent (almost) as many queries as would be required to determine an arbitrary ranking of the alternatives. In contrast, in this paper, we focus on single-peaked preferences. We show that such preferences can be elicited using only a linear number of comparison queries, if either the order with respect to which preferences are single-peaked is known, or at least one other agents complete preferences are known. We show that using a sublinear number of queries does not suffice. We also consider the case of cardinally single-peaked preferences. For this case, we show that if the alternatives cardinal positions are known, then an agents preferences can be elicited using only a logarithmic number of queries; however, we also show that if the cardinal positions are not known, then a sublinear number of queries does not suffice. We present experimental results for all elicitation algorithms. We also consider the problem of only eliciting enough information to determine the aggregate ranking, and show that even for this more modest objective, a sublinear number of queries per agent does not suffice for known ordinal or unknown cardinal positions. Finally, we discuss whether and how these techniques can be applied when preferences are almost single-peaked. △ Less

Submitted 15 January, 2014; originally announced January 2014.

Journal ref: Journal Of Artificial Intelligence Research, Volume 35, pages 161-191, 2009

False-name-proofness with Bid Withdrawal

Authors: Mingyu Guo, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: We study a more powerful variant of false-name manipulation in Internet auctions: an agent can submit multiple false-name bids, but then, once the allocation and payments have been decided, withdraw some of her false-name identities (have some of her false-name identities refuse to pay). While these withdrawn identities will not obtain the items they won, their initial presence may have been benef… ▽ More We study a more powerful variant of false-name manipulation in Internet auctions: an agent can submit multiple false-name bids, but then, once the allocation and payments have been decided, withdraw some of her false-name identities (have some of her false-name identities refuse to pay). While these withdrawn identities will not obtain the items they won, their initial presence may have been beneficial to the agent's other identities. We define a mechanism to be false-name-proof with withdrawal (FNPW) if the aforementioned manipulation is never beneficial. FNPW is a stronger condition than false-name-proofness (FNP). △ Less

Submitted 21 September, 2012; v1 submitted 31 August, 2012; originally announced August 2012.

Common Voting Rules as Maximum Likelihood Estimators

Authors: Vincent Conitzer, Tuomas Sandholm

Abstract: Voting is a very general method of preference aggregation. A voting rule takes as input every voter's vote (typically, a ranking of the alternatives), and produces as output either just the winning alternative or a ranking of the alternatives. One potential view of voting is the following. There exists a 'correct' outcome (winner/ranking), and each voter's vote corresponds to a noisy perception of… ▽ More Voting is a very general method of preference aggregation. A voting rule takes as input every voter's vote (typically, a ranking of the alternatives), and produces as output either just the winning alternative or a ranking of the alternatives. One potential view of voting is the following. There exists a 'correct' outcome (winner/ranking), and each voter's vote corresponds to a noisy perception of this correct outcome. If we are given the noise model, then for any vector of votes, we can △ Less

Submitted 4 July, 2012; originally announced July 2012.

Comments: Appears in Proceedings of the Twenty-First Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI2005)

Report number: UAI-P-2005-PG-145-152

Prediction Markets, Mechanism Design, and Cooperative Game Theory

Authors: Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: Prediction markets are designed to elicit information from multiple agents in order to predict (obtain probabilities for) future events. A good prediction market incentivizes agents to reveal their information truthfully; such incentive compatibility considerations are commonly studied in mechanism design. While this relation between prediction markets and mechanism design is well understood at a… ▽ More Prediction markets are designed to elicit information from multiple agents in order to predict (obtain probabilities for) future events. A good prediction market incentivizes agents to reveal their information truthfully; such incentive compatibility considerations are commonly studied in mechanism design. While this relation between prediction markets and mechanism design is well understood at a high level, the models used in prediction markets tend to be somewhat different from those used in mechanism design. This paper considers a model for prediction markets that fits more straightforwardly into the mechanism design framework. We consider a number of mechanisms within this model, all based on proper scoring rules. We discuss basic properties of these mechanisms, such as incentive compatibility. We also draw connections between some of these mechanisms and cooperative game theory. Finally, we speculate how one might build a practical prediction market based on some of these ideas. △ Less

Submitted 9 May, 2012; originally announced May 2012.

Comments: Appears in Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI2009)

Report number: UAI-P-2009-PG-101-108

Undominated Groves Mechanisms

Authors: Mingyu Guo, Evangelos Markakis, Krzysztof R. Apt, Vincent Conitzer

Abstract: The family of Groves mechanisms, which includes the well-known VCG mechanism (also known as the Clarke mechanism), is a family of efficient and strategy-proof mechanisms. Unfortunately, the Groves mechanisms are generally not budget balanced. That is, under such mechanisms, payments may flow into or out of the system of the agents, resulting in deficits or reduced utilities for the agents. We cons… ▽ More The family of Groves mechanisms, which includes the well-known VCG mechanism (also known as the Clarke mechanism), is a family of efficient and strategy-proof mechanisms. Unfortunately, the Groves mechanisms are generally not budget balanced. That is, under such mechanisms, payments may flow into or out of the system of the agents, resulting in deficits or reduced utilities for the agents. We consider the following problem: within the family of Groves mechanisms, we want to identify mechanisms that give the agents the highest utilities, under the constraint that these mechanisms must never incur deficits. We adopt a prior-free approach. We introduce two general measures for comparing mechanisms in prior-free settings. We say that a non-deficit Groves mechanism $M$ {\em individually dominates} another non-deficit Groves mechanism $M'$ if for every type profile, every agent's utility under $M$ is no less than that under $M'$, and this holds with strict inequality for at least one type profile and one agent. We say that a non-deficit Groves mechanism $M$ {\em collectively dominates} another non-deficit Groves mechanism $M'$ if for every type profile, the agents' total utility under $M$ is no less than that under $M'$, and this holds with strict inequality for at least one type profile. The above definitions induce two partial orders on non-deficit Groves mechanisms. We study the maximal elements corresponding to these two partial orders, which we call the {\em individually undominated} mechanisms and the {\em collectively undominated} mechanisms, respectively. △ Less

Submitted 4 January, 2013; v1 submitted 8 March, 2012; originally announced March 2012.

Comments: 34 pages. To appear in Journal of AI Research (JAIR)

Dominating Manipulations in Voting with Partial Information

Authors: Vincent Conitzer, Toby Walsh, Lirong Xia

Abstract: We consider manipulation problems when the manipulator only has partial information about the votes of the nonmanipulators. Such partial information is described by an information set, which is the set of profiles of the nonmanipulators that are indistinguishable to the manipulator. Given such an information set, a dominating manipulation is a non-truthful vote that the manipulator can cast which… ▽ More We consider manipulation problems when the manipulator only has partial information about the votes of the nonmanipulators. Such partial information is described by an information set, which is the set of profiles of the nonmanipulators that are indistinguishable to the manipulator. Given such an information set, a dominating manipulation is a non-truthful vote that the manipulator can cast which makes the winner at least as preferable (and sometimes more preferable) as the winner when the manipulator votes truthfully. When the manipulator has full information, computing whether or not there exists a dominating manipulation is in P for many common voting rules (by known results). We show that when the manipulator has no information, there is no dominating manipulation for many common voting rules. When the manipulator's information is represented by partial orders and only a small portion of the preferences are unknown, computing a dominating manipulation is NP-hard for many common voting rules. Our results thus throw light on whether we can prevent strategic behavior by limiting information about the votes of other voters. △ Less

Submitted 27 June, 2011; originally announced June 2011.

Comments: 7 pages by arxiv pdflatex, 1 figure. The 6-page version has the same content and will be published in Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-11)