Strategic Resource Selection with Homophilic Agents
0
📊
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper explores a variation of Resource Selection Games, where agents have different types and aim to use resources with a minimum fraction of same-type users.
- The paper considers the existence and quality of equilibria, the complexity of maximizing social welfare, and a bounded rationality model where agents can only estimate the utility of a resource.
- The bounded rationality model is shown to have favorable game-theoretic properties, with specific equilibria closely approximating those of the full knowledge setting.
Plain English Explanation
In Resource Selection Games and Congestion Games, agents select from a set of available resources, and their utility depends on the number of other agents using the same resources. This scenario assumes that agents are anonymous and homogeneous.
This paper presents a different model, where agents have different types and aim to use resources with a minimum fraction of same-type users. This is similar to Schelling Games, where agents have a tolerance threshold for the fraction of similar agents they want to be around.
In this model, agents strive to select resources where at least a certain fraction of the other users have the same type as themselves. For a threshold of 1, this generalizes Hedonic Diversity Games with a peak at 1.
The paper examines the existence and quality of equilibria in this model, as well as the complexity of maximizing social welfare. It also considers a bounded rationality model, where agents can only estimate the fraction of same-type agents on a resource, rather than knowing the exact numbers. Interestingly, this bounded rationality model is shown to have favorable game-theoretic properties, with specific equilibria closely approximating those of the full knowledge setting.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces a variation of Resource Selection Games, where agents with different types aim to use resources with a minimum fraction of same-type users. This is in contrast to the classic Resource Selection Games and Congestion Games, where agents are anonymous and homogeneous.
In the proposed model, agents have a tolerance threshold τ in the range [0, 1], which specifies the minimum desired fraction of same-type agents on a resource. Agents strive to select resources where at least a τ-fraction of the users have the same type as themselves. For τ = 1, this model generalizes Hedonic Diversity Games with a peak at 1.
The paper examines the existence and quality of equilibria in this model, as well as the complexity of maximizing social welfare. Additionally, it considers a bounded rationality model, where agents can only estimate the utility of a resource based on the fraction of same-type agents, rather than knowing the exact numbers.
Surprisingly, the authors show that this bounded rationality model yields favorable game-theoretic properties. The specific equilibria of the bounded rationality model closely approximate the equilibria of the full knowledge setting, which suggests that the bounded rationality assumption may be a reasonable simplification in practical applications.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents a novel and interesting variation of Resource Selection Games, which explores the implications of agent heterogeneity and the desire for similar-type co-users. The authors' analysis of the existence and quality of equilibria, as well as the complexity of maximizing social welfare, provides valuable insights into the game-theoretic properties of this model.
One potential limitation of the research is the focus on a relatively abstract model, which may not fully capture the nuances of real-world scenarios. While the bounded rationality assumption is an interesting contribution, it would be valuable to further explore the practical implications and applicability of this model in specific domains, such as resource allocation or social network dynamics.
Additionally, the paper does not delve into the implications of this model for societal fairness and equity. The notion of agents striving for a minimum fraction of same-type users raises questions about the potential for reinforcing or exacerbating social segregation and inequality. Further research could explore the ethical considerations and potential mitigating strategies within this framework.
Conclusion
This paper introduces a novel variation of Resource Selection Games, where agents with different types aim to use resources with a minimum fraction of same-type users. The analysis of equilibria and the bounded rationality model provides valuable insights into the game-theoretic properties of this scenario.
While the abstract nature of the model may limit its immediate practical applications, the research opens up avenues for further exploration, particularly in the context of real-world resource allocation and social dynamics. Examining the ethical implications and potential societal impacts of this model could also be a fruitful area for future work.
Overall, this paper contributes to the ongoing research on strategic resource selection and the interplay between agent heterogeneity and collective outcomes, which has important implications for a wide range of fields, from economics and computer science to sociology and public policy.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
📊
0
Strategic Resource Selection with Homophilic Agents
Jonathan Gadea Harder, Simon Krogmann, Pascal Lenzner, Alexander Skopalik
The strategic selection of resources by selfish agents is a classic research direction, with Resource Selection Games and Congestion Games as prominent examples. In these games, agents select available resources and their utility then depends on the number of agents using the same resources. This implies that there is no distinction between the agents, i.e., they are anonymous. We depart from this very general setting by proposing Resource Selection Games with heterogeneous agents that strive for joint resource usage with similar agents. So, instead of the number of other users of a given resource, our model considers agents with different types and the decisive feature is the fraction of same-type agents among the users. More precisely, similarly to Schelling Games, there is a tolerance threshold $tau in [0,1]$ which specifies the agents' desired minimum fraction of same-type agents on a resource. Agents strive to select resources where at least a $tau$-fraction of those resources' users have the same type as themselves. For $tau=1$, our model generalizes Hedonic Diversity Games with a peak at $1$. For our general model, we consider the existence and quality of equilibria and the complexity of maximizing social welfare. Additionally, we consider a bounded rationality model, where agents can only estimate the utility of a resource, since they only know the fraction of same-type agents on a given resource, but not the exact numbers. Thus, they cannot know the impact a strategy change would have on a target resource. Interestingly, we show that this type of bounded rationality yields favorable game-theoretic properties and specific equilibria closely approximate equilibria of the full knowledge setting.
Read more6/14/2024
0
Strategic Negotiations in Endogenous Network Formation
Akhil Jalan, Deepayan Chakrabarti
In network formation games, agents form edges with each other to maximize their utility. Each agent's utility depends on its private beliefs and its edges in the network. Strategic agents can misrepresent their beliefs to get a better resulting network. Most prior works in this area consider honest agents or a single strategic agent. Instead, we propose a model where any subset of agents can be strategic. We provide an efficient algorithm for finding the set of Nash equilibria, if any exist, and certify their nonexistence otherwise. We also show that when several strategic agents are present, their utilities can increase or decrease compared to when they are all honest. Small changes in the inter-agent correlations can cause such shifts. In contrast, the simpler one-strategic-agent setting explored in the literature lacks such complex patterns. Finally, we develop an algorithm by which new agents can learn the information needed for strategic behavior. Our algorithm works even when the (unknown) strategic agents deviate from the Nash-optimal strategies. We verify these results on both simulated networks and a real-world dataset on international trade.
Read more9/4/2024
0
Long-Term Fairness in Sequential Multi-Agent Selection with Positive Reinforcement
Bhagyashree Puranik, Ozgur Guldogan, Upamanyu Madhow, Ramtin Pedarsani
While much of the rapidly growing literature on fair decision-making focuses on metrics for one-shot decisions, recent work has raised the intriguing possibility of designing sequential decision-making to positively impact long-term social fairness. In selection processes such as college admissions or hiring, biasing slightly towards applicants from under-represented groups is hypothesized to provide positive feedback that increases the pool of under-represented applicants in future selection rounds, thus enhancing fairness in the long term. In this paper, we examine this hypothesis and its consequences in a setting in which multiple agents are selecting from a common pool of applicants. We propose the Multi-agent Fair-Greedy policy, that balances greedy score maximization and fairness. Under this policy, we prove that the resource pool and the admissions converge to a long-term fairness target set by the agents when the score distributions across the groups in the population are identical. We provide empirical evidence of existence of equilibria under non-identical score distributions through synthetic and adapted real-world datasets. We then sound a cautionary note for more complex applicant pool evolution models, under which uncoordinated behavior by the agents can cause negative reinforcement, leading to a reduction in the fraction of under-represented applicants. Our results indicate that, while positive reinforcement is a promising mechanism for long-term fairness, policies must be designed carefully to be robust to variations in the evolution model, with a number of open issues that remain to be explored by algorithm designers, social scientists, and policymakers.
Read more7/11/2024
📊
0
Data Sharing for Mean Estimation Among Heterogeneous Strategic Agents
Alex Clinton, Yiding Chen, Xiaojin Zhu, Kirthevasan Kandasamy
We study a collaborative learning problem where $m$ agents estimate a vector $muinmathbb{R}^d$ by collecting samples from normal distributions, with each agent $i$ incurring a cost $c_{i,k} in (0, infty]$ to sample from the $k^{text{th}}$ distribution $mathcal{N}(mu_k, sigma^2)$. Instead of working on their own, agents can collect data that is cheap to them, and share it with others in exchange for data that is expensive or even inaccessible to them, thereby simultaneously reducing data collection costs and estimation error. However, when agents have different collection costs, we need to first decide how to fairly divide the work of data collection so as to benefit all agents. Moreover, in naive sharing protocols, strategic agents may under-collect and/or fabricate data, leading to socially undesirable outcomes. Our mechanism addresses these challenges by combining ideas from cooperative and non-cooperative game theory. We use ideas from axiomatic bargaining to divide the cost of data collection. Given such a solution, we develop a Nash incentive-compatible (NIC) mechanism to enforce truthful reporting. We achieve a $mathcal{O}(sqrt{m})$ approximation to the minimum social penalty (sum of agent estimation errors and data collection costs) in the worst case, and a $mathcal{O}(1)$ approximation under favorable conditions. We complement this with a hardness result, showing that $Omega(sqrt{m})$ is unavoidable in any NIC mechanism.
Read more7/24/2024