Authors: Ioannis Anagnostides, Constantinos Daskalakis, Gabriele Farina, Noah Golowich, Tuomas Sandholm, Brian Hu Zhang
Organizations: Carnegie Mellon University · Massachusetts Institute of Technology · University of Texas at Austin · Strategy Robot, Inc., Strategic Machine, Inc., Optimized Markets, Inc.
There has been a surge of recent work on correlated equilibrium concepts in Markov games. However, existing results focus on concepts weaker than normal-form correlated equilibria (NFCEs), leaving open the more challenging question of computing such equilibria, which goes back to the seminal work of Papadimitriou and Roughgarden (JACM'08). Here, we establish the first efficient algorithm for NFCEs in finite-horizon Markov games with a fixed number of players n. In particular, with S states, horizon H, and at most A actions per player, it computes an ε-NFCE in time S(AH/ε)O(n). This is the first algorithm polynomial in 1/ε and the description of the game for NFCEs in an interesting class of problems beyond the normal-form setting. Moreover, under the usual assumption that recommendations are independent across states, we show PPAD-completeness---that is, computational equivalence to Nash equilibria---either in many-player games or when the precision is exponentially small. The key idea behind our approach is to run backward induction on a sequence of auxiliary stage games, but with the twist that in each step we compute a constant-expectation correlated equilibrium. This is a natural refinement of correlated equilibrium in which the conditional expected payoff from obeying is independent of the recommendation. In fact, our reduction goes both ways, establishing an equivalence between constant-expectation CEs and NFCEs in Markov games. For a fixed number of players, we observe that a constant-expectation CE can be computed approximately by combining linear programming with suitable discretization. In contrast, it is PPAD-hard in i) polymatrix (many-player) games at constant precision, and ii) two-player games at exponentially small precision. The latter result follows from an unexpected connection to rank-2 two-player games.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Backward induction prescribes Enter using the continuation CE’s average payoff. The CE mixes equally between the two shaded profiles. Observing its full policy lets Player 1 stop whenever S is recommended, so the resulting distribution is not an NFCE.
A (coarse) correlated equilibrium (CE) is information-value-free (IVF) if a player can match the payoff obtained from recommendations by committing to a fixed action. Motivated by the problem of regulating algorithmic collusion, this refinement was introduced by Hartline, Wang, and Zhang [EC'26], who showed that it can be computed in polynomial time in explicitly represented normal-form game. In this paper, we examine the complexity of IVF(C)CEs in succinct games, which model more realistic strategic interactions that feature either many players or exponentially many pure strategies. We first show that computing an information-value-free CE is PPAD-complete in many-player polymatrix games or two-player Bayesian games, even when the approximation is a constant. We also prove an unconditional exponential query lower bound. Our results establish that IVFCEs are intractable, even in the centralized model, and rule out the existence of any efficient learning dynamics. This significantly strengthens the impossibility result of Hartline, Wang, and Zhang, which concerns a particular class of learning algorithms, and furnishes strong computational critiques of recent regulation on algorithmic collusion. To sidestep these hardness results, we examine the complexity of information-value-free CCE. Certain no-regret algorithms---such as regret matching or FTRL---provide a fully polynomial-time approximation scheme (FPTAS) for this problem. The complexity when the approximation is exponentially small turns out to be nuanced. On the one hand, leveraging no-regret dynamics, we establish membership in CLS=PPAD∩PLS. On the other hand, we show that it is at least as hard as the P-matrix linear complementarity problem, and hence as hard as simple stochastic games. This shows that even IVFCCEs are unlikely to admit a polynomial-time algorithm barring a major breakthrough.
In this work, we study radically uncoupled learning in discounted general-sum Markov games. Assuming ``ETH for PPAD", we show that, for every fixed discount factor, there is no polynomial-time algorithm for computing inverse-polynomially accurate coarse correlated equilibria in discounted general-sum Markov games when players learn independently in decentralized settings. Complementing this hardness result, we provide what appears to be the first radically uncoupled algorithm with sub-exponential convergence guarantees to coarse correlated equilibria in discounted general-sum Markov games without imposing any structural restrictions on the game. Our algorithm is a layered variant of optimistic mirror descent with an increasing step-size schedule tailored to the multi-agent setting. Finally, we develop both full-feedback and partial feedback versions of the aforementioned algorithm and establish sub-exponential convergence guarantees for each case.
Asrin Efe Yorulmaz, Ugur Aydin, Tamer Basar
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA
We show that computing an approximate correlated equilibrium of a polytope game is PPAD-complete, and thus polynomial-time equivalent to finding a Nash equilibrium. This challenges the conventional view in game theory that correlated equilibria are more tractable objects than Nash equilibria. From a conceptual standpoint, we connect correlated equilibria to a natural generalization of fixed points, which we call fixed sets. A fixed set of a continuous function f is a nonempty finite set S such that S⊆convf(S). Our main technical contribution is to prove that computing a fixed set is PPAD-hard even at inverse polynomial precision.
Ioannis Anagnostides, Constantinos Daskalakis, Gabriele Farina +3
Carnegie Mellon University. · Massachusetts Institute of Technology. · University of Texas, Austin. +1