Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userGame of Coins
64
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Alexander Spiegelman
Publication date
2018
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We formalize the current practice of strategic mining in multi-cryptocurrency markets as a game, and prove that any better-response learning in such games converges to equilibrium. We then offer a reward design scheme that moves the system configuration from any initial equilibrium to a desired one for any better-response learning of the miners. Our work introduces the first multi-coin strategic attack for adaptive and learning miners, as well as the study of reward design in a multi-agent system of learning agents.
rate research
Read More
We want to introduce another smoothing approach by treating each geometric element as a player in a game: a quest for the best element quality. In other words, each player has the goal of becoming as regular as possible. The set of strategies for each element is given by all translations of its vertices. Ideally, he would like to quantify this regularity using a quality measure which corresponds to the utility function in game theory. Each player is aware of the other players utility functions as well as their set of strategies, which is analogous to his own utility function and strategies. In the simplest case, the utility functions only depend on the regularity. In more complicated cases this utility function depends on the element size, the curvature, or even the solution to a differential equation. This article is a sketch of a possible game-theoretical approach to mesh smoothing and still on-going research.
Game theory is an established branch of mathematics that offers a rich set of mathematical tools for multi-person strategic decision making that can be used to model the interactions of decision makers in security problems who compete for limited and shared resources. This article presents a review of the literature in the area of game theoretical modelling of network/cybersecurity.
We consider a game in which players are the vertices of a directed graph. Initially, Nature chooses one player according to some fixed distribution and gives her a buck, which represents the request to perform a chore. After completing the task, the player passes the buck to one of her out-neighbors in the graph. The procedure is repeated indefinitely and each players cost is the asymptotic expected frequency of times that she receives the buck. We consider a deterministic and a stochastic version of the game depending on how players select the neighbor to pass the buck. In both cases we prove the existence of pure equilibria that do not depend on the initial distribution; this is achieved by showing the existence of a generalized ordinal potential. We then use the price of anarchy and price of stability to measure fairness of these equilibria. We also study a buck-holding variant of the game in which players want to maximize the frequency of times they hold the buck, which includes the PageRank game as a special case.
A traditional assumption in game theory is that players are opaque to one another -- if a player changes strategies, then this change in strategies does not affect the choice of other players strategies. In many situations this is an unrealistic assumption. We develop a framework for reasoning about games where the players may be translucent to one another; in particular, a player may believe that if she were to change strategies, then the other player would also change strategies. Translucent players may achieve significantly more efficient outcomes than opaque ones. Our main result is a characterization of strategies consistent with appropriate analogues of common belief of rationality. Common Counterfactual Belief of Rationality (CCBR) holds if (1) everyone is rational, (2) everyone counterfactually believes that everyone else is rational (i.e., all players i believe that everyone else would still be rational even if i were to switch strategies), (3) everyone counterfactually believes that everyone else is rational, and counterfactually believes that everyone else is rational, and so on. CCBR characterizes the set of strategies surviving iterated removal of minimax dominated strategies: a strategy $sigma_i$ is minimax dominated for i if there exists a strategy $sigma_i$ for i such that $min_{mu_{-i}} u_i(sigma_i, mu_{-i}) > max_{mu_{-i}} u_i(sigma_i, mu_{-i})$.
Is there a joint distribution of $n$ random variables over the natural numbers, such that they always form an increasing sequence and whenever you take two subsets of the set of random variables of the same cardinality, their distribution is almost the same? We show that the answer is yes, but that the random variables will have to take values as large as $2^{2^{dots ^{2^{Thetaleft(frac{1}{epsilon}right)}}}}$, where $epsilonleq epsilon_n$ measures how different the two distributions can be, the tower contains $n-2$ $2$s and the constants in the $Theta$ notation are allowed to depend on $n$. This result has an important consequence in game theory: It shows that even though you can define extensive form games that cannot be implemented on players who can tell the time, you can have implementations that approximate the game arbitrarily well.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
