Author
Listed:
- Jason Milionis
(a Department of Computer Science , Columbia University , New York , NY 10027)
- Christos Papadimitriou
(a Department of Computer Science , Columbia University , New York , NY 10027)
- Georgios Piliouras
(b Google DeepMind , London EC4A 3TW , United Kingdom)
- Kelly Spendlove
(c Google , Mountain View , CA 94043)
Abstract
The Nash equilibrium—a, combination of choices by the players of a game from which no self-interested player would deviate—is the predominant solution concept in game theory. Even though every game has a Nash equilibrium, it is not known whether there are deterministic behaviors of the players who play a game repeatedly that are guaranteed to converge to a Nash equilibrium of the game from all starting points. If one assumes that the players’ behavior is a discrete-time or continuous-time rule whereby the current mixed strategy profile is mapped to the next, this question becomes a problem in the theory of dynamical systems. We apply this theory, and in particular Conley index theory, to prove a general impossibility result: There exist games, for which all game dynamics fail to converge to Nash equilibria from all starting points. The games which help prove this impossibility result are degenerate, but we conjecture that the same result holds, under computational complexity assumptions, for nondegenerate games. We also prove a stronger impossibility result for the solution concept of approximate Nash equilibria: For a set of games of positive measure, no game dynamics can converge to the set of approximate Nash equilibria for a sufficiently small yet substantial approximation bound. Our results establish that, although the notions of Nash equilibrium and its computation-inspired approximations are universally applicable in all games, they are fundamentally incomplete as predictors of long-term player behavior.
Suggested Citation
Jason Milionis & Christos Papadimitriou & Georgios Piliouras & Kelly Spendlove, 2023.
"An impossibility theorem in game dynamics,"
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 120(41), pages 2305349120-, October.
Handle:
RePEc:nas:journl:v:120:y:2023:p:e2305349120
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2305349120
Download full text from publisher
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:nas:journl:v:120:y:2023:p:e2305349120. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Eric Cain (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.pnas.org/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.