Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/2090236.2090241acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesitcsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Quantum strategic game theory

Published: 08 January 2012 Publication History

Abstract

We propose a simple yet rich model to extend strategic games to the quantum setting, in which we define quantum Nash and correlated equilibria and study the relations between classical and quantum equilibria. Unlike all previous work that focused on qualitative questions on specific games of very small sizes, we quantitatively address the following fundamental question for general games of growing sizes:
How much "advantage" can playing quantum strategies provide, if any?
Two measures of the advantage are studied.
1. Since game mainly is about each player trying to maximize individual payoff, a natural measure is the increase of payoff by playing quantum strategies. We consider natural mappings between classical and quantum states, and study how well those mappings preserve equilibrium properties. Among other results, we exhibit a correlated equilibrium p whose quantum superposition counterpart [EQUATION] is far from being a quantum correlated equilibrium; actually a player can increase her payoff from almost 0 to almost 1 in a [0, 1]-normalized game. We achieve this by a tensor product construction on carefully designed base cases. The result can also be interpreted as in Meyer's comparison [47]: In a state no classical player can gain, one player using quantum computers has an huge advantage than continuing to play classically.
2. Another measure is the hardness of generating correlated equilibria, for which we propose to study correlation complexity, a new complexity measure for correlation generation. We show that there are n-bit correlated equilibria which can be generated by only one EPR pair followed by local operation (without communication), but need at least log2(n) classical shared random bits plus communication. The randomized lower bound can be improved to n, the best possible, assuming (even a much weaker version of) a recent conjecture in linear algebra. We believe that the correlation complexity, as a complexity-theoretical counterpart of the celebrated Bell's inequality, has independent interest in both physics and computational complexity theory and deserves more explorations.

References

[1]
Andris Ambainis. A new protocol and lower bounds for quantum coin flipping. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 68:398--416, 2004.
[2]
Andris Ambainis, Leonard Schulman, Amnon Ta-Shma, Umesh Vazirani, and Avi Wigderson. The quantum communication complexity of sampling. SIAM Journal on Computing, 32(6):1570--1585, 2003.
[3]
Robert Aumann. Subjectivity and correlation in randomized strategies. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 1:67--96, 1974.
[4]
Ziv Bar-Yossef, T. S. Jayram, Ravi Kumar, and D. Sivakumar. An information statistics approach to data stream and communication complexity. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 68(4):702--732, 2004.
[5]
Leroy Beasley and Thomas Laffey. Real rank versus nonnegative rank. Linear Algebra and its Applications, 431:2330--2335, 2009.
[6]
John Bell. On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. Physics, 1:195--200, 1965.
[7]
Simon Benjamin and Patrick Hayden. Comment on "quantum games and quantum strategies". Physical Review Letters, 87(6):069801, 2001.
[8]
Simon Benjamin and Patrick Hayden. Multiplayer quantum games. Physical Review A, 64(3):030301, 2001.
[9]
Michael W. Berry, Murray Browne, Amy N. Langville, V. Paul Pauca, and Robert J. Plemmonsc. Algorithms and applications for approximate nonnegative matrix factorization. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 52:155--173, 2007.
[10]
Harry Buhrman, Richard Cleve, Serge Massar, and Ronald de Wolf. Nonlocality and communication complexity. Review of Modern Physics, 82:665--698, 2010.
[11]
Xi Chen, Xiaotie Deng, and Shanghua Teng. Settling the complexity of computing two-player nash equilibria. Journal of the ACM, 56(3), 2009.
[12]
Kay-Yut Chen1 and Tad Hogg. How well do people play a quantum prisonerŠs dilemma? Quantum Information Processing, 5(1):43--67, 2006.
[13]
Taksu Cheon and Izumi Tsutsui. Classical and quantum contents of solvable game theory on hilbert space. Physics Letters A, 348:147--152, 2006.
[14]
Moody Chu and Robert Plemmons. Nonnegative matrix factorization and applications. Image, 34:2--7, 2005.
[15]
Richard Cleve, Peter Hoyer, Ben Toner, and John Watrous. Consequences and limits of nonlocal strategies. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 236--249, 2004.
[16]
Vincent Conitzer and Tuomas Sandholm. Communication complexity as a lower bound for learning in games. In Proceedings of the twenty-first international conference on Machine learning, page 24, 2004.
[17]
G. M. D'Ariano, R. D. Gill, M. Keyl, B. Kummerer, H. Maassen, and R. F. Werner. The quantum monty hall problem. Quantum Information and Computation, 2(5):355--366, 2002.
[18]
Constantinos Daskalakis, Paul Goldberg, and Christos Papadimitriou. Computing a nash equilibrium is PPAD-complete. SIAM Journal on Computing, 39(1):195--259, 2009.
[19]
Jon Dattorro. Convex Optimization and Euclidean Distance Geometry. Meboo Publishing USA, 2006. Available at author's homepage https://ccrma.stanford.edu/dattorro/mybook.html.
[20]
Jiangfeng Du, Hui Li, Xiaodong Xu, Mingjun Shi, Jihui Wu, Xianyi Zhou, and Rongdian Han. Experimental realization of quantum games on a quantum computer. Physical Review Letters, 88(5-6):137902, 2002.
[21]
Jiangfeng Du, Hui Li, Xiaodong Xu, Xianyi Zhou, and Rongdian Han. Entanglement enhanced multiplayer quantum games. Physics Letters A, 302(5-6):229--233, 2002.
[22]
Jens Eisert, Martin Wilkens, and Maciej Lewenstein. Quantum games and quantum strategies. Physical Review Letters, 83(15):3077--3080, 1999.
[23]
Adrian Flitney and Derek Abbott. Advantage of a quantum player over a classical one in 2 x 2 quantum games. Proceedings of The Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 459(2038):2463--2474, 2003.
[24]
Adrian Flitney and Derek Abbott. Quantum games with decoherence. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 38(2):449--459, 2005.
[25]
Drew Fudenberg and Jean Tirole. Game theory. MIT Press, 1991.
[26]
Itzhak Gilboa and Eitan Zemel. Nash and correlated equilibria: Some complexity considerations. Games and Economic Behavior, 1:80--93, 1989.
[27]
Lov Grover. Quantum mechanics helps in searching for a needle in a haystack. Physical Review Letters, 79(2):325--328, 1997.
[28]
Gus Gutoski and John Watrous. Toward a general theory of quantum games. In Proceedings of the 39th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 565--574, 2007.
[29]
Gus Gutoski and Xiaodi Wu. Parallel approximation of min-max problems with applications to classical and quantum zero-sum games. arXiv:1011.2787, 2010.
[30]
Prahladh Harsha, Rahul Jain, David McAllester, and Jaikumar Radhakrishnan. The communication complexity of correlation. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 56(1):438--449, 2009.
[31]
Sergiu Hart and Yishay Mansour. How long to equilibrium? the communication complexity of uncoupled equilibrium procedures. Games and Economic Behavior, 69(1):107--126, 2010.
[32]
A. Iqbal and A. H. Toor. Quantum cooperative games. Physics Letters A, 293(3-4):103--108, 2002.
[33]
Tsuyoshi Ito, Hirotada Kobayashi, Daniel Preda, Xiaoming Sun, and Andrew Chi-Chih Yao. Generalized tsirelson inequalities, commuting-operator provers, and multi-prover interactive proof systems. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC), pages 187--198, 2008.
[34]
Rahul Jain and John Watrous. Parallel approximation of non-interactive zero-sum quantum games. In Proceedings of the 24th IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 243--253, 2009.
[35]
Julia Kempe, Hirotada Kobayashi, Keiji Matsumoto, Ben Toner, and Thomas Vidick. Entangled games are hard to approximate. In Proceedings of The 49th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 447--456, 2008.
[36]
Julia Kempe, Hirotada Kobayashi, Keiji Matsumoto, and Thomas Vidick. Using entanglement in quantum multi-prover interactive proofs. Computational Complexity, 18(2):273--307, 2009.
[37]
Julia Kempe and Oded Regev. No strong parallel repetition with entangled and non-signaling provers. In Proceedings of The 25th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 7--15, 2010.
[38]
Julia Kempe, Oded Regev, and Ben Toner. Unique games with entangled provers are easy. SIAM Journal on Computing, 39(7):3207--3229, 2010.
[39]
Iordanis Kerenidis and Shengyu Zhang. A quantum protocol for sampling correlated equilibria unconditionally and without a mediator. arXiv:1104.1770, 2011.
[40]
Hartmut Klauck, Troy Lee, and Shengyu Zhang. An explicit and exponential separation between randomized and quantum correlation complexities. manuscript, 2011.
[41]
I. Kremer. Quantum Communication. PhD thesis, MasterŠs thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, 1995.
[42]
Nathan Krislock and Henry Wolkowicz. Euclidean distance matrices and applications. Handbook of Semidefinite, Cone and Polynomial Optimization, 2010.
[43]
Chiu Fan Lee and Neil Johnson. Efficiency and formalism of quantum games. Physical Review A, 67:022311, 2003.
[44]
László Lovász. Communication complexity: A survey. In book Paths, flows, and VLSI-layout edited by B. Korte, L. Lovász, H. Pr omel, and A. Schrijver, pages 235--265. Springer-Verlag, 1990.
[45]
Shachar Lovett and Emanuele Viola. Bounded-depth circuits cannot sample good codes. Manuscript, 2010. available at author's homepage: http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/viola/papers/LoV.pdf.
[46]
Luca Marinatto and Tullio Weber. A quantum approach to static games of complete information. Physics Letters A, 272:291--303, 2000.
[47]
David Meyer. Quantum strategies. Physical Review Letters, 82(5):1052--1055, 1999.
[48]
David Meyer. Quantum communication in games. In AIP Conference Proceedings of Quantum Communication, Measurement and Computing, pages 36--39, 2004.
[49]
Carlos Mochon. Quantum weak coin flipping with arbitrarily small bias. arXiv:0711.4114, 2007.
[50]
John Nash. Equilibrium points in n-person games. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 36(1):48--49, 1950.
[51]
John Nash. Non-cooperative games. The Annals of Mathematics, 54(2):286--295, 1951.
[52]
Michael Nielsen and Isaac Chuang. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000.
[53]
Noam Nisan. Lower bounds for non-commutative computation. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 410--418, 1991.
[54]
Martin Osborne and Ariel Rubinstein. A course in game theory. MIT Press, 1994.
[55]
Robert Prevedel, André Stefanov, Philip Walther, and Anton Zeilinger. Experimental realization of a quantum game on a one-way quantum computer. New Journal of Physics, 9:205, 2007.
[56]
Yaoyun Shi and Shengyu Zhang. Communication complexity of generating quantum states. Manuscript, 2011.
[57]
Mario Szegedy. Quantum speed-up of markov chain based algorithms. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 32--41, 2004.
[58]
Vijay Vazirani, Noam Nisan, Tim Roughgarden, and Éva Tardos. Algorithmic Game Theory. Cambridge University Press, 2007.
[59]
Emanuele Viola. The complexity of distributions. In Proceedings of the 51st IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 202--211, 2010.
[60]
John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press, 1944.
[61]
John Watrous. Theory of Quantum Information. Lecture notes, University of Waterloo, 2008.
[62]
Zhaohui Wei and Shengyu Zhang. Characterization of quantum correlated equilibria. arXiv:1105.5353, 2011.
[63]
Andreas Winter. Secret, public and quantum correlation cost of triples of random variables. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, pages 2270--2274, 2005.
[64]
Aaron Wyner. The common information of two dependent random variables. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 21(2):163--179, 1975.
[65]
Mihalis Yannakakis. Expressing combinatorial optimization problems by linear programs. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 223--228, 1988.
[66]
Haiqing Yin and Hongwei Liu. Nonnegative matrix factorization with bounded total variational regularization for face recognition. Pattern Recognition Letters, 31(16):2468--2473, 2010.
[67]
Taiping Zhang, Bin Fang, Weining Liu, Yuan-Yan Tang, Guanghui Hea, and Jing Wen. Neurocomputing for vision research; advances in blind signal processing total variation norm-based nonnegative matrix factorization for identifying discriminant representation of image patterns. Neurocomputing, 71(10-12):1824--1831, 2008.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Improving social welfare in non-cooperative games with different types of quantum resourcesQuantum10.22331/q-2024-06-17-13768(1376)Online publication date: 17-Jun-2024
  • (2024)The Generations of Classical Correlations via Quantum SchemesIEEE Transactions on Information Theory10.1109/TIT.2024.339134170:6(4160-4169)Online publication date: Jun-2024
  • (2024)On the Asymptotic Nonnegative Rank of Matrices and its Applications in Information Theory2024 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT)10.1109/ISIT57864.2024.10619320(1955-1960)Online publication date: 7-Jul-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
ITCS '12: Proceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference
January 2012
516 pages
ISBN:9781450311151
DOI:10.1145/2090236
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 08 January 2012

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. correlated equilibrium
  2. nash equilibrium
  3. quantum computation
  4. quantum entanglement
  5. strategic game theory

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

ITCS '12
Sponsor:
ITCS '12: Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science
January 8 - 10, 2012
Massachusetts, Cambridge

Acceptance Rates

ITCS '12 Paper Acceptance Rate 39 of 93 submissions, 42%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 172 of 513 submissions, 34%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)63
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6
Reflects downloads up to 04 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Improving social welfare in non-cooperative games with different types of quantum resourcesQuantum10.22331/q-2024-06-17-13768(1376)Online publication date: 17-Jun-2024
  • (2024)The Generations of Classical Correlations via Quantum SchemesIEEE Transactions on Information Theory10.1109/TIT.2024.339134170:6(4160-4169)Online publication date: Jun-2024
  • (2024)On the Asymptotic Nonnegative Rank of Matrices and its Applications in Information Theory2024 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT)10.1109/ISIT57864.2024.10619320(1955-1960)Online publication date: 7-Jul-2024
  • (2024)Quantum Büchi AutomataTheoretical Computer Science10.1016/j.tcs.2024.114740(114740)Online publication date: Jul-2024
  • (2022)Matrix multiplicative weights updates in quantum zero-sum gamesProceedings of the 36th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems10.5555/3600270.3600568(4123-4135)Online publication date: 28-Nov-2022
  • (2022)Quantum game theory and the complexity of approximating quantum Nash equilibriaQuantum10.22331/q-2022-12-22-8826(882)Online publication date: 22-Dec-2022
  • (2022)Quantum and Classical Hybrid Generations for Classical CorrelationsIEEE Transactions on Information Theory10.1109/TIT.2021.312340168:1(302-310)Online publication date: Jan-2022
  • (2022)Two-player quantum games: When player strategies are via directional choicesQuantum Information Processing10.1007/s11128-022-03526-521:6Online publication date: 14-Jun-2022
  • (2021)Restricted Hidden Cardinality Constraints in Causal ModelsElectronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science10.4204/EPTCS.343.6343(119-131)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2021
  • (2021)Belief-invariant and quantum equilibria in games of incomplete informationTheoretical Computer Science10.1016/j.tcs.2021.09.041Online publication date: Oct-2021
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media