Showing 1–22 of 22 results for author: Mamageishvili, A

BoLD: Fast and Cheap Dispute Resolution

Authors: Mario M. Alvarez, Henry Arneson, Ben Berger, Lee Bousfield, Chris Buckland, Yafah Edelman, Edward W. Felten, Daniel Goldman, Raul Jordan, Mahimna Kelkar, Akaki Mamageishvili, Harry Ng, Aman Sanghi, Victor Shoup, Terence Tsao

Abstract: BoLD is a new dispute resolution protocol that is designed to replace the originally deployed Arbitrum dispute resolution protocol. Unlike that protocol, BoLD is resistant to delay attacks. It achieves this resistance without a significant increase in onchain computation costs and with reduced staking costs. BoLD is a new dispute resolution protocol that is designed to replace the originally deployed Arbitrum dispute resolution protocol. Unlike that protocol, BoLD is resistant to delay attacks. It achieves this resistance without a significant increase in onchain computation costs and with reduced staking costs. △ Less

Submitted 16 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

Crowdsearch

Authors: Hans Gersbach, Akaki Mamageishvili, Fikri Pitsuwan

Abstract: A common economic process is crowdsearch, wherein a group of agents is invited to search for a valuable physical or virtual object, e.g. creating and patenting an invention, solving an open scientific problem, or identifying vulnerabilities in software. We study a binary model of crowdsearch in which agents have different abilities to find the object. We characterize the types of equilibria and id… ▽ More A common economic process is crowdsearch, wherein a group of agents is invited to search for a valuable physical or virtual object, e.g. creating and patenting an invention, solving an open scientific problem, or identifying vulnerabilities in software. We study a binary model of crowdsearch in which agents have different abilities to find the object. We characterize the types of equilibria and identify which type of crowd maximizes the likelihood of finding the object. Sometimes, however, an unlimited crowd is not sufficient to guarantee that the object is found. It even can happen that inviting more agents lowers the probability of finding the object. We characterize the optimal prize and show that offering only one prize (winner-takes-all) maximizes the probability of finding the object but is not necessarily optimal for the crowdsearch designer. △ Less

Submitted 14 November, 2023; originally announced November 2023.

Comments: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2304.00077

Shared Sequencing and Latency Competition as a Noisy Contest

Authors: Akaki Mamageishvili, Jan Christoph Schlegel

Abstract: We study shared sequencing for different chains from an economic angle. We introduce a minimal non-trivial model that captures cross-domain arbitrageurs' behavior and compare the performance of shared sequencing to that of separate sequencing. While shared sequencing dominates separate sequencing trivially in the sense that it makes it more likely that cross-chain arbitrage opportunities are reali… ▽ More We study shared sequencing for different chains from an economic angle. We introduce a minimal non-trivial model that captures cross-domain arbitrageurs' behavior and compare the performance of shared sequencing to that of separate sequencing. While shared sequencing dominates separate sequencing trivially in the sense that it makes it more likely that cross-chain arbitrage opportunities are realized, the investment and revenue comparison is more subtle: In the simple latency competition induced by First Come First Serve ordering, shared sequencing creates more wasteful latency competition compared to separate sequencing. For bidding-based sequencing, the most surprising insight is that the revenue of shared sequencing is not always higher than that of separate sequencing and depends on the transaction ordering rule applied and the arbitrage value potentially realized. △ Less

Submitted 3 October, 2023; originally announced October 2023.

EIP-4844 Economics and Rollup Strategies

Authors: Davide Crapis, Edward W. Felten, Akaki Mamageishvili

Abstract: We study the economics of the Ethereum improvement proposal 4844 and its effect on rollups' data posting strategies. Rollups' cost consists of two parts: data posting and delay. In the new proposal, the data posting cost corresponds to a blob posting cost and is fixed in each block, no matter how much of the blob is utilized by the rollup. The tradeoff is clear: the rollup prefers to post a full b… ▽ More We study the economics of the Ethereum improvement proposal 4844 and its effect on rollups' data posting strategies. Rollups' cost consists of two parts: data posting and delay. In the new proposal, the data posting cost corresponds to a blob posting cost and is fixed in each block, no matter how much of the blob is utilized by the rollup. The tradeoff is clear: the rollup prefers to post a full blob, but if its transaction arrival rate is low, filling up a blob space causes too large delay cost. The first result of the paper shows that if a rollup transaction arrival rate is too low, it prefers to use the regular blockspace market for data posting, as it offers a more flexible cost structure. Second, we show that shared blob posting is not always beneficial for participating rollups and change in the aggregate blob posting cost in the equilibrium depends on the types of participating rollups. In the end, we discuss blob cost-sharing rules from an axiomatic angle. △ Less

Submitted 2 October, 2023; originally announced October 2023.

Incentive Schemes for Rollup Validators

Authors: Akaki Mamageishvili, Edward W. Felten

Abstract: We design and analyze attention games that incentivize validators to check computation results. We show that no pure strategy Nash equilibrium of the game without outside parties exists by a simple argument. We then proceed to calculate the security of the system in the mixed Nash equilibrium, as a function of the number of validators and their stake sizes. Our results provide lower and upper boun… ▽ More We design and analyze attention games that incentivize validators to check computation results. We show that no pure strategy Nash equilibrium of the game without outside parties exists by a simple argument. We then proceed to calculate the security of the system in the mixed Nash equilibrium, as a function of the number of validators and their stake sizes. Our results provide lower and upper bounds on the optimal number of validators. More concretely, a minimal feasible number of validators minimizes the probability of failure. The framework also allows to calculate optimum stake sizes, depending on the target function. In the end, we discuss optimal design of rewards by the protocol for validators. △ Less

Submitted 5 August, 2023; originally announced August 2023.

Buying Time: Latency Racing vs. Bidding in Transaction Ordering

Authors: Akaki Mamageishvili, Mahimna Kelkar, Jan Christoph Schlegel, Edward W. Felten

Abstract: We design TimeBoost: a practical transaction ordering policy for rollup sequencers that takes into account both transaction timestamps and bids; it works by creating a score from timestamps and bids, and orders transactions based on this score. TimeBoost is transaction-data-independent (i.e., can work with encrypted transactions) and supports low transaction finalization times similar to a first… ▽ More We design TimeBoost: a practical transaction ordering policy for rollup sequencers that takes into account both transaction timestamps and bids; it works by creating a score from timestamps and bids, and orders transactions based on this score. TimeBoost is transaction-data-independent (i.e., can work with encrypted transactions) and supports low transaction finalization times similar to a first-come first-serve (FCFS or pure-latency) ordering policy. At the same time, it avoids the inefficient latency competition created by an FCFS policy. It further satisfies useful economic properties of first-price auctions that come with a pure-bidding policy. We show through rigorous economic analyses how TimeBoost allows players to compete on arbitrage opportunities in a way that results in better guarantees compared to both pure-latency and pure-bidding approaches. △ Less

Submitted 16 August, 2023; v1 submitted 3 June, 2023; originally announced June 2023.

Decentralized Attack Search and the Design of Bug Bounty Schemes

Authors: Hans Gersbach, Akaki Mamageishvili, Fikri Pitsuwan

Abstract: Systems and blockchains often have security vulnerabilities and can be attacked by adversaries, with potentially significant negative consequences. Therefore, infrastructure providers increasingly rely on bug bounty programs, where external individuals probe the system and report any vulnerabilities (bugs) in exchange for rewards (bounty). We develop a simple contest model of bug bounty. A group o… ▽ More Systems and blockchains often have security vulnerabilities and can be attacked by adversaries, with potentially significant negative consequences. Therefore, infrastructure providers increasingly rely on bug bounty programs, where external individuals probe the system and report any vulnerabilities (bugs) in exchange for rewards (bounty). We develop a simple contest model of bug bounty. A group of individuals of arbitrary size is invited to undertake a costly search for bugs. The individuals differ with regard to their abilities, which we capture by different costs to achieve a certain probability to find bugs if any exist. Costs are private information. We study equilibria of the contest and characterize the optimal design of bug bounty schemes. In particular, the designer can vary the size of the group of individuals invited to search, add a paid expert, insert an artificial bug with some probability, and pay multiple prizes. △ Less

Submitted 1 September, 2023; v1 submitted 31 March, 2023; originally announced April 2023.

Efficient Rollup Batch Posting Strategy on Base Layer

Authors: Akaki Mamageishvili, Edward W. Felten

Abstract: We design efficient and robust algorithms for the batch posting of rollup chain calldata on the base layer chain, using tools from operations research. We relate the costs of posting and delaying, by converting them to the same units and adding them up. The algorithm that keeps the average and maximum queued number of batches tolerable enough improves the posting costs of the trivial algorithm, wh… ▽ More We design efficient and robust algorithms for the batch posting of rollup chain calldata on the base layer chain, using tools from operations research. We relate the costs of posting and delaying, by converting them to the same units and adding them up. The algorithm that keeps the average and maximum queued number of batches tolerable enough improves the posting costs of the trivial algorithm, which posts batches immediately when they are created, by 8%. On the other hand, the algorithm that only cares moderately about the batch queue length can improve the trivial algorithm posting costs by 29%. Our findings can be used by layer two projects that post data to the base layer at some regular rate. △ Less

Submitted 24 February, 2023; v1 submitted 20 December, 2022; originally announced December 2022.

Comments: 13 pages, 2 figures, forthcoming at WTSC

Axioms for Constant Function Market Makers

Authors: Jan Christoph Schlegel, Mateusz Kwaśnicki, Akaki Mamageishvili

Abstract: We study axiomatic foundations for different classes of constant-function automated market makers (CFMMs). We focus particularly on separability and on different invariance properties under scaling. Our main results are an axiomatic characterization of a natural generalization of constant product market makers (CPMMs), popular in decentralized finance, on the one hand, and a characterization of th… ▽ More We study axiomatic foundations for different classes of constant-function automated market makers (CFMMs). We focus particularly on separability and on different invariance properties under scaling. Our main results are an axiomatic characterization of a natural generalization of constant product market makers (CPMMs), popular in decentralized finance, on the one hand, and a characterization of the Logarithmic Scoring Rule Market Makers (LMSR), popular in prediction markets, on the other hand. The first class is characterized by the combination of independence and scale invariance, whereas the second is characterized by the combination of independence and translation invariance. The two classes are therefore distinguished by a different invariance property that is motivated by different interpretations of the numéraire in the two applications. However, both are pinned down by the same separability property. Moreover, we characterize the CPMM as an extremal point within the class of scale invariant, independent, symmetric AMMs with non-concentrated liquidity provision. Our results add to a formal analysis of mechanisms that are currently used for decentralized exchanges and connect the most popular class of DeFi AMMs to the most popular class of prediction market AMMs. △ Less

Submitted 14 February, 2023; v1 submitted 30 September, 2022; originally announced October 2022.

Staking Pools on Blockchains

Authors: Hans Gersbach, Akaki Mamageishvili, Manvir Schneider

Abstract: On several proof-of-stake blockchains, agents engaged in validating transactions can open a pool to which others can delegate their stake in order to earn higher returns. We develop a model of staking pool formation in the presence of malicious agents and establish existence and uniqueness of equilibria. We then identify potential and risk of staking pools. First, allowing for staking pools lowers… ▽ More On several proof-of-stake blockchains, agents engaged in validating transactions can open a pool to which others can delegate their stake in order to earn higher returns. We develop a model of staking pool formation in the presence of malicious agents and establish existence and uniqueness of equilibria. We then identify potential and risk of staking pools. First, allowing for staking pools lowers blockchain security. Yet, honest stake holders obtain higher returns. Second, by choosing welfare optimal distribution rewards, staking pools prevent that malicious agents receive large rewards. Third, when pool owners can freely distribute the returns from validation to delegators, staking pools disrupt blockchain operations, since malicious agents attract most delegators by offering generous returns. △ Less

Submitted 3 October, 2022; v1 submitted 11 March, 2022; originally announced March 2022.

On-Chain Auctions with Deposits

Authors: Jan Christoph Schlegel, Akaki Mamageishvili

Abstract: Second-price auctions with deposits are frequently used in blockchain environments. An auction takes place on-chain: bidders deposit an amount that fully covers their bid (but possibly exceeds it) in a smart contract. The deposit is used as insurance against bidders not honoring their bid if they win. The deposit, but not the bid, is publicly observed during the bidding phase of the auction. The… ▽ More Second-price auctions with deposits are frequently used in blockchain environments. An auction takes place on-chain: bidders deposit an amount that fully covers their bid (but possibly exceeds it) in a smart contract. The deposit is used as insurance against bidders not honoring their bid if they win. The deposit, but not the bid, is publicly observed during the bidding phase of the auction. The visibility of deposits can fundamentally change the strategic structure of the auction if bidding happens sequentially: Bidding is costly since deposit are costly to make. Thus, deposits can be used as a costly signal for a high valuation. This is the source of multiple inefficiencies: To engage in costly signalling, a bidder who bids first and has a high valuation will generally over-deposit in equilibrium, i.e.~deposit more than he will bid. If high valuations are likely there can, moreover, be entry deterrence through high deposits: a bidder who bids first can deter subsequent bidders from entering the auction. Pooling can happen in equilibrium, where bidders of different valuations deposit the same amount. The auction fails to allocate the item to the bidder with the highest valuation. △ Less

Submitted 16 July, 2022; v1 submitted 30 March, 2021; originally announced March 2021.

Vote Delegation with Unknown Preferences

Authors: Hans Gersbach, Akaki Mamageishvili, Manvir Schneider

Abstract: We examine vote delegation when preferences of agents are private information. One group of agents (delegators) does not want to participate in voting and abstains under conventional voting or can delegate its votes to the other group (voters) who decide between two alternatives. We show that free delegation favors minorities, that is, alternatives that have a lower chance of winning ex-ante. The… ▽ More We examine vote delegation when preferences of agents are private information. One group of agents (delegators) does not want to participate in voting and abstains under conventional voting or can delegate its votes to the other group (voters) who decide between two alternatives. We show that free delegation favors minorities, that is, alternatives that have a lower chance of winning ex-ante. The same occurs if the number of voting rights that actual voters can have is capped. When the number of delegators increases, the probability that the ex-ante minority wins under free and capped delegation converges to the one under conventional voting--albeit non-monotonically. Our results are obtained in a private value setting but can be readily translated into an information aggregation setting when voters receive a signal about the ''correct" alternative with some probability. △ Less

Submitted 23 October, 2021; v1 submitted 17 February, 2021; originally announced February 2021.

Vote Delegation and Misbehavior

Authors: Hans Gersbach, Akaki Mamageishvili, Manvir Schneider

Abstract: We study vote delegation with "well-behaving" and "misbehaving" agents and compare it with conventional voting. Typical examples for vote delegation are validation or governance tasks on blockchains. There is a majority of well-behaving agents, but they may abstain or delegate their vote to other agents since voting is costly. Misbehaving agents always vote. We compare conventional voting allowing… ▽ More We study vote delegation with "well-behaving" and "misbehaving" agents and compare it with conventional voting. Typical examples for vote delegation are validation or governance tasks on blockchains. There is a majority of well-behaving agents, but they may abstain or delegate their vote to other agents since voting is costly. Misbehaving agents always vote. We compare conventional voting allowing for abstention with vote delegation. Preferences of voters are private information and a positive outcome is achieved if well-behaving agents win. We illustrate that vote delegation leads to quite different outcomes than conventional voting with abstention. In particular, we obtain three insights: First, if the number of misbehaving voters, denoted by f , is high, both voting methods fail to deliver a positive outcome. Second, if f takes an intermediate value, conventional voting delivers a positive outcome, while vote delegation fails with probability one. Third, if f is low, delegation delivers a positive outcome with higher probability than conventional voting. Finally, our results characterize worst-case outcomes that can happen in a liquid democracy. △ Less

Submitted 15 May, 2021; v1 submitted 17 February, 2021; originally announced February 2021.

FileBounty: Fair Data Exchange

Authors: Simon Janin, Kaihua Qin, Akaki Mamageishvili, Arthur Gervais

Abstract: Digital contents are typically sold online through centralized and custodian marketplaces, which requires the trading partners to trust a central entity. We present FileBounty, a fair protocol which, assuming the cryptographic hash of the file of interest is known to the buyer, is trust-free and lets a buyer purchase data for a previously agreed monetary amount, while guaranteeing the integrity of… ▽ More Digital contents are typically sold online through centralized and custodian marketplaces, which requires the trading partners to trust a central entity. We present FileBounty, a fair protocol which, assuming the cryptographic hash of the file of interest is known to the buyer, is trust-free and lets a buyer purchase data for a previously agreed monetary amount, while guaranteeing the integrity of the contents. To prevent misbehavior, FileBounty guarantees that any deviation from the expected participants' behavior results in a negative financial payoff; i.e. we show that honest behavior corresponds to a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium. Our novel deposit refunding scheme is resistant to extortion attacks under rational adversaries. If buyer and seller behave honestly, FileBounty's execution requires only three on-chain transactions, while the actual data is exchanged off-chain in an efficient and privacy-preserving manner. We moreover show how FileBounty enables a flexible peer-to-peer setting where multiple parties fairly sell a file to a buyer. △ Less

Submitted 9 July, 2021; v1 submitted 25 August, 2020; originally announced August 2020.

Comments: Simon Janin and Kaihua Qin contributed equally to this work

Mechanism Design and Blockchains

Authors: Akaki Mamageishvili, Jan Christoph Schlegel

Abstract: Game theory is often used as a tool to analyze decentralized systems and their properties, in particular, blockchains. In this note, we take the opposite view. We argue that blockchains can and should be used to implement economic mechanisms because they can help to overcome problems that occur if trust in the mechanism designer cannot be assumed. Mechanism design deals with the allocation of reso… ▽ More Game theory is often used as a tool to analyze decentralized systems and their properties, in particular, blockchains. In this note, we take the opposite view. We argue that blockchains can and should be used to implement economic mechanisms because they can help to overcome problems that occur if trust in the mechanism designer cannot be assumed. Mechanism design deals with the allocation of resources to agents, often by extracting private information from them. Some mechanisms are immune to early information disclosure, while others may heavily depend on it. Some mechanisms have to randomize to achieve fairness and efficiency. Both issues, information disclosure, and randomness require trust in the mechanism designer. If there is no trust, mechanisms can be manipulated. We claim that mechanisms that use randomness or sequential information disclosure are much harder, if not impossible, to audit. Therefore, centralized implementation is often not a good solution. We consider some of the most frequently used mechanisms in practice and identify circumstances under which manipulation is possible. We propose a decentralized implementation of such mechanisms, that can be, in practical terms, realized by blockchain technology. Moreover, we argue in which environments a decentralized implementation of a mechanism brings a significant advantage. △ Less

Submitted 1 October, 2020; v1 submitted 5 May, 2020; originally announced May 2020.

No truthful mechanism can be better than $n$ approximate for two natural problems

Authors: Stefano Leucci, Akaki Mamageishvili, Paolo Penna

Abstract: This work gives the first natural non-utilitarian problems for which the trivial $n$ approximation via VCG mechanisms is the best possible. That is, no truthful mechanism can be better than $n$ approximate, where $n$ is the number of agents. The problems are the min-max variant of shortest path and (directed) minimum spanning tree mechanism design problems. In these procurement auctions, agents ow… ▽ More This work gives the first natural non-utilitarian problems for which the trivial $n$ approximation via VCG mechanisms is the best possible. That is, no truthful mechanism can be better than $n$ approximate, where $n$ is the number of agents. The problems are the min-max variant of shortest path and (directed) minimum spanning tree mechanism design problems. In these procurement auctions, agents own the edges of a network, and the corresponding edge costs are private. Instead of the total weight of the subnetwork, in the min-max variant we aim to minimize the maximum agent cost. △ Less

Submitted 30 May, 2018; v1 submitted 18 December, 2017; originally announced December 2017.

Comments: to appear in Games and Economic Behavior

Sophisticated Attacks on Decoy Ballots: The Devil's Menu and the Market for Lemons

Authors: Hans Gersbach, Akaki Mamageishvili, Oriol Tejada

Abstract: Decoy ballots do not count in election outcomes, but otherwise they are indistinguishable from real ballots. By means of a game-theoretical model, we show that decoy ballots may not provide effective protection against a malevolent adversary trying to buy real ballots. If the citizenry is divided into subgroups (or districts), the adversary can construct a so-called "Devil's Menu" consisting of se… ▽ More Decoy ballots do not count in election outcomes, but otherwise they are indistinguishable from real ballots. By means of a game-theoretical model, we show that decoy ballots may not provide effective protection against a malevolent adversary trying to buy real ballots. If the citizenry is divided into subgroups (or districts), the adversary can construct a so-called "Devil's Menu" consisting of several prices. In equilibrium, the adversary can buy the real ballots of any strict subset of districts at a price corresponding to the willingness to sell on the part of the citizens holding such ballots. By contrast, decoy voters are trapped into selling their ballots at a low, or even negligible, price. Blowing up the adversary's budget by introducing decoy ballots may thus turn out to be futile. The Devil's Menu can also be applied to the well-known "Lemons Problem". △ Less

Submitted 14 December, 2017; originally announced December 2017.

Sequential Solutions in Machine Scheduling Games

Authors: Cong Chen, Paul Giessler, Akaki Mamageishvili, Matus Mihalak, Paolo Penna

Abstract: We consider the classical machine scheduling, where $n$ jobs need to be scheduled on $m$ machines, and where job $j$ scheduled on machine $i$ contributes $p_{i,j}\in \mathbb{R}$ to the load of machine $i$, with the goal of minimizing the makespan, i.e., the maximum load of any machine in the schedule. We study inefficiency of schedules that are obtained when jobs arrive sequentially one by one, an… ▽ More We consider the classical machine scheduling, where $n$ jobs need to be scheduled on $m$ machines, and where job $j$ scheduled on machine $i$ contributes $p_{i,j}\in \mathbb{R}$ to the load of machine $i$, with the goal of minimizing the makespan, i.e., the maximum load of any machine in the schedule. We study inefficiency of schedules that are obtained when jobs arrive sequentially one by one, and the jobs choose themselves the machine on which they will be scheduled, aiming at being scheduled on a machine with small load. We measure the inefficiency of a schedule as the ratio of the makespan obtained in the worst-case equilibrium schedule, and of the optimum makespan. This ratio is known as the \emph{sequential price of anarchy}. We also introduce two alternative inefficiency measures, which allow for a favorable choice of the order in which the jobs make their decisions. As our first result, we disprove the conjecture of Hassin and Yovel claiming that the sequential price of anarchy for $m=2$ machines is at most 3. We show that the sequential price of anarchy grows at least linearly with the number $n$ of players, i.e., we show that $SPoA = Ω(n)$. Furthermore, we show that there exists an order of the jobs, resulting in makespan that is at most linearly larger than the optimum makespan. To the end, we show that if an authority can change the order of the jobs adaptively to the decisions made by the jobs so far (but cannot influence the decisions of the jobs), then there exists an adaptive ordering in which the jobs end up in an optimum schedule. △ Less

Submitted 8 September, 2020; v1 submitted 13 November, 2016; originally announced November 2016.

Tighter Bounds on the Inefficiency Ratio of Stable Equilibria in Load Balancing Games

Authors: Akaki Mamageishvili, Paolo Penna

Abstract: In this paper we study the inefficiency ratio of stable equilibria in load balancing games introduced by Asadpour and Saberi [3]. We prove tighter lower and upper bounds of 7/6 and 4/3, respectively. This improves over the best known bounds in problem (19/18 and 3/2, respectively). Equivalently, the results apply to the question of how well the optimum for the $L_2$ -norm can approximate the… ▽ More In this paper we study the inefficiency ratio of stable equilibria in load balancing games introduced by Asadpour and Saberi [3]. We prove tighter lower and upper bounds of 7/6 and 4/3, respectively. This improves over the best known bounds in problem (19/18 and 3/2, respectively). Equivalently, the results apply to the question of how well the optimum for the $L_2$ -norm can approximate the $L_{\infty}$-norm (makespan) in identical machines scheduling. △ Less

Submitted 10 December, 2015; originally announced December 2015.

Multicast Network Design Game on a Ring

Authors: Akaki Mamageishvili, Matus Mihalak

Abstract: In this paper we study quality measures of different solution concepts for the multicast network design game on a ring topology. We recall from the literature a lower bound of 4/3 and prove a matching upper bound for the price of stability, which is the ratio of the social costs of a best Nash equilibrium and of a general optimum. Therefore, we answer an open question posed by Fanelli et al. in [1… ▽ More In this paper we study quality measures of different solution concepts for the multicast network design game on a ring topology. We recall from the literature a lower bound of 4/3 and prove a matching upper bound for the price of stability, which is the ratio of the social costs of a best Nash equilibrium and of a general optimum. Therefore, we answer an open question posed by Fanelli et al. in [12]. We prove an upper bound of 2 for the ratio of the costs of a potential optimizer and of an optimum, provide a construction of a lower bound, and give a computer-assisted argument that it reaches $2$ for any precision. We then turn our attention to players arriving one by one and playing myopically their best response. We provide matching lower and upper bounds of 2 for the myopic sequential price of anarchy (achieved for a worst-case order of the arrival of the players). We then initiate the study of myopic sequential price of stability and for the multicast game on the ring we construct a lower bound of 4/3, and provide an upper bound of 26/19. To the end, we conjecture and argue that the right answer is 4/3. △ Less

Submitted 15 July, 2015; originally announced July 2015.

Comments: 12 pages, 4 figures

An $H_{n/2}$ Upper Bound on the Price of Stability of Undirected Network Design Games

Authors: Akaki Mamageishvili, Matúš Mihalák, Simone Montemezzani

Abstract: In the network design game with $n$ players, every player chooses a path in an edge-weighted graph to connect her pair of terminals, sharing costs of the edges on her path with all other players fairly. We study the price of stability of the game, i.e., the ratio of the social costs of a best Nash equilibrium (with respect to the social cost) and of an optimal play. It has been shown that the pric… ▽ More In the network design game with $n$ players, every player chooses a path in an edge-weighted graph to connect her pair of terminals, sharing costs of the edges on her path with all other players fairly. We study the price of stability of the game, i.e., the ratio of the social costs of a best Nash equilibrium (with respect to the social cost) and of an optimal play. It has been shown that the price of stability of any network design game is at most $H_n$, the $n$-th harmonic number. This bound is tight for directed graphs. For undirected graphs, the situation is dramatically different, and tight bounds are not known. It has only recently been shown that the price of stability is at most $H_n \left(1-\frac{1}{Θ(n^4)} \right)$, while the worst-case known example has price of stability around 2.25. In this paper we improve the upper bound considerably by showing that the price of stability is at most $H_{n/2} + ε$ for any $ε$ starting from some suitable $n \geq n(ε)$. △ Less

Submitted 13 June, 2014; originally announced June 2014.

Tree Nash Equilibria in the Network Creation Game

Authors: Akaki Mamageishvili, Matus Mihalak, Dominik Muller

Abstract: In the network creation game with n vertices, every vertex (a player) buys a set of adjacent edges, each at a fixed amount α > 0. It has been conjectured that for α >= n, every Nash equilibrium is a tree, and has been confirmed for every α >= 273n. We improve upon this bound and show that this is true for every α >= 65n. To show this, we provide new and improved results on the local structure of N… ▽ More In the network creation game with n vertices, every vertex (a player) buys a set of adjacent edges, each at a fixed amount α > 0. It has been conjectured that for α >= n, every Nash equilibrium is a tree, and has been confirmed for every α >= 273n. We improve upon this bound and show that this is true for every α >= 65n. To show this, we provide new and improved results on the local structure of Nash equilibria. Technically, we show that if there is a cycle in a Nash equilibrium, then α < 65n. Proving this, we only consider relatively simple strategy changes of the players involved in the cycle. We further show that this simple approach cannot be used to show the desired upper bound α < n (for which a cycle may exist), but conjecture that a slightly worse bound α < 1.3n can be achieved with this approach. Towards this conjecture, we show that if a Nash equilibrium has a cycle of length at most 10, then indeed α < 1.3n. We further provide experimental evidence suggesting that when the girth of a Nash equilibrium is increasing, the upper bound on α obtained by the simple strategy changes is not increasing. To the end, we investigate the approach for a coalitional variant of Nash equilibrium, where coalitions of two players cannot collectively improve, and show that if α >= 41n, then every such Nash equilibrium is a tree. △ Less

Submitted 30 October, 2013; originally announced October 2013.