IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v9y2012i1p41-54.html

Robust Adversarial Risk Analysis: A Level- k Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Laura McLay

    (Department of Statistical Sciences and Operations Research, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia 23284)

  • Casey Rothschild

    (Department of Economics, Wellesley College, Wellesley, Massachusetts 02481)

  • Seth Guikema

    (Department of Geography and Environmental Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21318)

Abstract

Adversarial risk analysis is an active and important area of decision analytic research. Both single-actor decision analysis and multiple-actor game theory have been applied to this problem, with game theoretic methods being particularly popular. Although game theory models do explicitly capture strategic interactions between attackers and defenders, two of the key assumptions---decision making based on subjective expected utility maximization and common knowledge of rationality---are known to be descriptively inaccurate in some situations. This paper addresses these shortcomings by proposing, formulating, and illustrating the application of robust optimization methodologies to a level- k game theory model for adversarial risk analysis. Level- k game theory provides a practical method for modeling bounded rationality. Robust optimization provides an alternative way to model the actions of conservative players facing “deep” uncertainties about their environment---uncertainties that are possible to bound but that are difficult or impossible to represent using probability distributions. Our approach thus combines level- k and robust optimization insights to provide a computationally tractable model of boundedly rational players who are faced with significant and difficult to quantify uncertainties.

Suggested Citation

  • Laura McLay & Casey Rothschild & Seth Guikema, 2012. "Robust Adversarial Risk Analysis: A Level- k Approach," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 41-54, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:9:y:2012:i:1:p:41-54
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.1110.0221
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.1110.0221
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.1110.0221?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stahl, Dale II & Wilson, Paul W., 1994. "Experimental evidence on players' models of other players," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 309-327, December.
    2. George E. Apostolakis & Douglas M. Lemon, 2005. "A Screening Methodology for the Identification and Ranking of Infrastructure Vulnerabilities Due to Terrorism," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 361-376, April.
    3. Stahl Dale O. & Wilson Paul W., 1995. "On Players' Models of Other Players: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 218-254, July.
    4. Erim Kardeş & Fernando Ordóñez & Randolph W. Hall, 2011. "Discounted Robust Stochastic Games and an Application to Queueing Control," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 365-382, April.
    5. Garud N. Iyengar, 2005. "Robust Dynamic Programming," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 257-280, May.
    6. Keith Hartley & Todd Sandler (ed.), 1995. "Handbook of Defense Economics," Handbook of Defense Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    7. Insua, Insua Rios & Rios, Jesus & Banks, David, 2009. "Adversarial Risk Analysis," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 104(486), pages 841-854.
    8. Nagel, Rosemarie, 1995. "Unraveling in Guessing Games: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1313-1326, December.
    9. Enders, Walter & Sandler, Todd, 1995. "Terrorism: Theory and applications," Handbook of Defense Economics, in: Keith Hartley & Todd Sandler (ed.), Handbook of Defense Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 213-249, Elsevier.
    10. Seth D. Guikema, 2009. "Game Theory Models of Intelligent Actors in Reliability Analysis: An Overview of the State of the Art," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Vicki M. M. Bier & M. Naceur Azaiez (ed.), Game Theoretic Risk Analysis of Security Threats, chapter 2, pages 13-31, Springer.
    11. Zhuang, Jun & Bier, Vicki M. & Alagoz, Oguzhan, 2010. "Modeling secrecy and deception in a multiple-period attacker-defender signaling game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(2), pages 409-418, June.
    12. Azaiez, M.N. & Bier, Vicki M., 2007. "Optimal resource allocation for security in reliability systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 773-786, September.
    13. Arnab Nilim & Laurent El Ghaoui, 2005. "Robust Control of Markov Decision Processes with Uncertain Transition Matrices," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 780-798, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hunt, Kyle & Zhuang, Jun, 2024. "A review of attacker-defender games: Current state and paths forward," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 401-417.
    2. Michael Perry & Hadi El-Amine, 2019. "Computational Efficiency in Multivariate Adversarial Risk Analysis Models," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 314-332, December.
    3. Michael Macgregor Perry & Hadi El-Amine, 2021. "Computational Efficiency in Multivariate Adversarial Risk Analysis Models," Papers 2110.12572, arXiv.org.
    4. Buede, Dennis M. & Mahoney, Suzanne & Ezell, Barry & Lathrop, John, 2012. "Using plural modeling for predicting decisions made by adaptive adversaries," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 77-89.
    5. Kjell Hausken & Jonathan W. Welburn & Jun Zhuang, 2024. "A Review of Attacker–Defender Games and Cyber Security," Games, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-27, August.
    6. L. Robin Keller, 2012. "From the Editor---Decisions over Time (Exploding Offers or Purchase Regret), in Game Settings (Embedded Nash Bargaining or Adversarial Games), and in Influence Diagrams," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 1-5, March.
    7. Hausken, Kjell, 2024. "Fifty Years of Operations Research in Defense," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(2), pages 355-368.
    8. William N. Caballero & Ethan Gharst & David Banks & Jeffery D. Weir, 2023. "Multipolar Security Cooperation Planning: A Multiobjective, Adversarial-Risk-Analysis Approach," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 16-39, March.
    9. Jorge González-Ortega & Refik Soyer & David Ríos Insua & Fabrizio Ruggeri, 2021. "An Adversarial Risk Analysis Framework for Batch Acceptance Problems," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 25-40, March.
    10. Xiaojun (Gene) Shan & Jun Zhuang, 2014. "Modeling Credible Retaliation Threats in Deterring the Smuggling of Nuclear Weapons Using Partial Inspection---A Three-Stage Game," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 43-62, March.
    11. Eric DuBois & Ashley Peper & Laura A. Albert, 2023. "Interdicting Attack Plans with Boundedly Rational Players and Multiple Attackers: An Adversarial Risk Analysis Approach," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 202-219, September.
    12. Michael Macgregor Perry, 2021. "Analyzing a Complex Game for the South China Sea Fishing Dispute using Response Surface Methodologies," Papers 2110.12568, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2021.
    13. Roponen, Juho & Ríos Insua, David & Salo, Ahti, 2020. "Adversarial risk analysis under partial information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(1), pages 306-316.
    14. Jason R. W. Merrick & Fabrizio Ruggeri & Refik Soyer & L. Robin Keller, 2012. "From the Editors---Games and Decisions in Reliability and Risk," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 81-85, June.
    15. César Gil & David Rios Insua & Jesus Rios, 2016. "Adversarial Risk Analysis for Urban Security Resource Allocation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 727-741, April.
    16. Hausken, Kjell, 2017. "Defense and attack for interdependent systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(2), pages 582-591.
    17. Kaiyue Zheng & Laura A. Albert, 2019. "A Robust Approach for Mitigating Risks in Cyber Supply Chains," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(9), pages 2076-2092, September.
    18. Juan Luis Santos, 2014. "Application of adversarial risk testing to anomaly-based network intrusion detection systems," Journal of Socioeconomic Engineering, Instituto Universitario de Análisis Económico y Social, issue 2, pages 31-40, December.
    19. Yanling Chang & Alan Erera & Chelsea White, 2015. "A leader–follower partially observed, multiobjective Markov game," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 103-128, December.
    20. Stefan Rass & Sandra König & Stefan Schauer, 2017. "Defending Against Advanced Persistent Threats Using Game-Theory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-43, January.
    21. Mohammad E. Nikoofal & Mehmet Gümüs, 2015. "On the value of terrorist’s private information in a government’s defensive resource allocation problem," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(6), pages 533-555, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ben Yaghlane, Asma & Azaiez, M. Naceur, 2017. "Systems under attack-survivability rather than reliability: Concept, results, and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1156-1164.
    2. Casey Rothschild & Laura McLay & Seth Guikema, 2012. "Adversarial Risk Analysis with Incomplete Information: A Level‐k Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(7), pages 1219-1231, July.
    3. Tsakas, Nikolas & Xefteris, Dimitrios, 2018. "Electoral competition with third party entry in the lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 121-134.
    4. Llorente-Saguer, Aniol & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Szech, Nora, 2023. "Designing contests between heterogeneous contestants: An experimental study of tie-breaks and bid-caps in all-pay auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    5. Vincent P. Crawford & Nagore Iriberri, 2004. "Fatal Attraction: Focality, Naivete, and Sophistication in Experimental Hide-and-Seek Games," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000316, UCLA Department of Economics.
    6. Kneeland, Terri, 2016. "Coordination under limited depth of reasoning," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 49-64.
    7. Quement, Mark T. Le & Marcin, Isabel, 2020. "Communication and voting in heterogeneous committees: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 449-468.
    8. Andreas Blume & John Duffy & April Mitchell Franco, 2008. "Decentralized Organizational Learning: An Experimental Investigation," Working Paper 382, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised May 2009.
    9. Haruvy, Ernan & Stahl, Dale O., 2007. "Equilibrium selection and bounded rationality in symmetric normal-form games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 98-119, January.
    10. Berger, Ulrich & De Silva, Hannelore & Fellner-Röhling, Gerlinde, 2016. "Cognitive hierarchies in the minimizer game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 337-348.
    11. Stefano Galavotti & Luigi Moretti & Paola Valbonesi, 2018. "Sophisticated Bidders in Beauty-Contest Auctions," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(4), pages 1-26, November.
    12. Youzong Xu, 2019. "Collective decision-making of voters with heterogeneous levels of rationality," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 178(1), pages 267-287, January.
    13. Baethge, Caroline, 2016. "Performance in the beauty contest: How strategic discussion enhances team reasoning," Passauer Diskussionspapiere, Betriebswirtschaftliche Reihe B-17-16, University of Passau, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    14. Binswanger, Johannes & Prüfer, Jens, 2012. "Democracy, populism, and (un)bounded rationality," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 358-372.
    15. María Cubel & Santiago Sanchez-Pages, 2014. "Gender differences and stereotypes in the beauty contest," Working Papers 2014/13, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    16. Kyle Hyndman & Antoine Terracol & Jonathan Vaksmann, 2022. "Beliefs and (in)stability in normal-form games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(4), pages 1146-1172, September.
    17. Ismail Saglam & Mehmet Y. Gurdal & Ayca Ozdogan, 2011. "Truth-telling and Trust in Sender-receiver Games with Intervention," Koç University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum Working Papers 1123, Koc University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum.
    18. Hausken, Kjell, 2024. "Fifty Years of Operations Research in Defense," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(2), pages 355-368.
    19. Sanjith Gopalakrishnan & Moksh Matta & Hasan Cavusoglu, 2022. "The Dark Side of Technological Modularity: Opportunistic Information Hiding During Interorganizational System Adoption," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 1072-1092, September.
    20. Au, Pak Hung & Lim, Wooyoung & Zhang, Jipeng, 2022. "In vino veritas? Communication under the influence—An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 325-340.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:9:y:2012:i:1:p:41-54. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.