Self-enforcing Agreements and Forward Induction Reasoning

In dynamic games, players may observe a deviation from a pre-play, possibly incomplete, non-binding agreement before the game is over. The attempt to rationalize the deviation may lead players to revise their beliefs about the deviator’s behaviour in the continuation of the game. This instance of forward induction reasoning is based on interactive beliefs about not just rationality, but also the compliance with the agreement itself. I study the effects of such rationalization on the self-enforceability of the agreement. Accordingly, outcomes of the game are deemed implementable by some agreement or not. Conclusions depart substantially from what the traditional equilibrium refinements suggest. A non-subgame perfect equilibrium outcome may be induced by a self-enforcing agreement, while a subgame perfect equilibrium outcome may not. The incompleteness of the agreement can be crucial to implement an outcome.

Trembling-Hand Perfection in Extensive-Form Games with Commitment

We initiate the study of equilibrium refinements based on trembling-hand perfection in extensive-form games with commitment strategies, that is, where one player commits to a strategy first. We show that the standard strong (and weak) Stackelberg equilibria are not suitable for trembling-hand perfection, because the limit of a sequence of such strong (weak) Stackelberg commitment strategies of a perturbed game may not be a strong (weak) Stackelberg equilibrium itself. However, we show that the universal set of all Stackelberg equilibria (i.e., those that are optimal for at least some follower response function) is natural for trembling- hand perfection: it does not suffer from the problem above. We also prove that determining the existence of a Stackelberg equilibrium--refined or not--that gives the leader expected value at least v is NP-hard. This significantly extends prior complexity results that were specific to strong Stackelberg equilibrium.

Smoothing Method for Approximate Extensive-Form Perfect Equilibrium

Nash equilibrium is a popular solution concept for solving imperfect-information games in practice. However, it has a major drawback: it does not preclude suboptimal play in branches of the game tree that are not reached in equilibrium. Equilibrium refinements can mend this issue, but have experienced little practical adoption. This is largely due to a lack of scalable algorithms.Sparse iterative methods, in particular first-order methods, are known to be among the most effective algorithms for computing Nash equilibria in large-scale two-player zero-sum extensive-form games. In this paper, we provide, to our knowledge, the first extension of these methods to equilibrium refinements. We develop a smoothing approach for behavioral perturbations of the convex polytope that encompasses the strategy spaces of players in an extensive-form game. This enables one to compute an approximate variant of extensive-form perfect equilibria. Experiments show that our smoothing approach leads to solutions with dramatically stronger strategies at information sets that are reached with low probability in approximate Nash equilibria, while retaining the overall convergence rate associated with fast algorithms for Nash equilibrium. This has benefits both in approximate equilibrium finding (such approximation is necessary in practice in large games) where some probabilities are low while possibly heading toward zero in the limit, and exact equilibrium computation where the low probabilities are actually zero.