IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v14y2023i1p12-d1051042.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Information Design for Multiple Interdependent Defenders: Work Less, Pay Off More

Author

Listed:
  • Chenghan Zhou

    (Department of Computer Science, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA)

  • Andrew Spivey

    (Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA)

  • Haifeng Xu

    (Department of Computer Science and Data Science Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60605, USA)

  • Thanh H. Nguyen

    (Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA)

Abstract

This paper studies the problem of information design in a general security game setting in which multiple self-interested defenders attempt to provide protection simultaneously for the same set of important targets against an unknown attacker. A principal, who can be one of the defenders, has access to certain private information (i.e., attacker type), whereas other defenders do not. We investigate the question of how that principal, with additional private information, can influence the decisions of the defenders by partially and strategically revealing her information. In particular, we develop a polynomial time ellipsoid algorithm to compute an optimal private signaling scheme. Our key finding is that the separation oracle in the ellipsoid approach can be carefully reduced to bipartite matching. Furthermore, we introduce a compact representation of any ex ante persuasive signaling schemes by exploiting intrinsic security resource allocation structures, enabling us to compute an optimal scheme significantly faster. Our experiment results show that by strategically revealing private information, the principal can significantly enhance the protection effectiveness for the targets.

Suggested Citation

  • Chenghan Zhou & Andrew Spivey & Haifeng Xu & Thanh H. Nguyen, 2023. "Information Design for Multiple Interdependent Defenders: Work Less, Pay Off More," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:14:y:2023:i:1:p:12-:d:1051042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/14/1/12/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/14/1/12/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vicki Bier & Santiago Oliveros & Larry Samuelson, 2007. "Choosing What to Protect: Strategic Defensive Allocation against an Unknown Attacker," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 9(4), pages 563-587, August.
    2. Bergemann, Dirk & Morris, Stephen, 2016. "Bayes correlated equilibrium and the comparison of information structures in games," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(2), May.
    3. Powell, Robert, 2007. "Defending against Terrorist Attacks with Limited Resources," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(3), pages 527-541, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2009. "Intelligence and impact contests in systems with redundancy, false targets, and partial protection," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(12), pages 1927-1941.
    2. Yang Jiao & Zijun Luo, 2019. "A model of terrorism and counterterrorism with location choices," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 301-313, June.
    3. Bakker, Craig & Webster, Jennifer B. & Nowak, Kathleen E. & Chatterjee, Samrat & Perkins, Casey J. & Brigantic, Robert, 2020. "Multi-Game Modeling for Counter-Smuggling," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    4. Zhang, Jing & Zhuang, Jun & Jose, Victor Richmond R., 2018. "The role of risk preferences in a multi-target defender-attacker resource allocation game," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 95-104.
    5. Timothy Mathews & Aniruddha Bagchi & João Ricardo Faria, 2019. "Simple analytics of the impact of terror generation on attacker–defender interactions," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 287-299, June.
    6. Dan J. Kovenock & Brian Roberson, 2015. "The Optimal Defense of Network Connectivity," CESifo Working Paper Series 5653, CESifo.
    7. Kjell Hausken, 2014. "Choosing what to protect when attacker resources and asset valuations are uncertain," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 24(3), pages 23-44.
    8. Nakao, Keisuke, 2019. "Modeling Deterrence by Denial and by Punishment," MPRA Paper 95100, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Dan Kovenock & Brian Roberson, 2018. "The Optimal Defense Of Networks Of Targets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(4), pages 2195-2211, October.
    10. Dan Kovenock & Brian Roberson & Roman M. Sheremeta, 2019. "The attack and defense of weakest-link networks," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 175-194, June.
    11. Jenelius, Erik & Westin, Jonas & Holmgren, Åke J., 2010. "Critical infrastructure protection under imperfect attacker perception," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 16-26.
    12. Haphuriwat, N. & Bier, V.M., 2011. "Trade-offs between target hardening and overarching protection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 320-328, August.
    13. Levitin, Gregory & Hausken, Kjell, 2009. "False targets vs. redundancy in homogeneous parallel systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 588-595.
    14. Mohammad E. Nikoofal & Mehmet Gümüs, 2015. "On the value of terrorist’s private information in a government’s defensive resource allocation problem," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(6), pages 533-555, June.
    15. Hunt, Kyle & Zhuang, Jun, 2024. "A review of attacker-defender games: Current state and paths forward," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 401-417.
    16. Niyazi Bakır, 2011. "A Stackelberg game model for resource allocation in cargo container security," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 5-22, July.
    17. Catherine C. Langlois & Jean-Pierre P. Langlois, 2017. "Rational deterrence by proxy: designing cooperative security agreements," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 1-33, January.
    18. Nakao, Keisuke, 2017. "Denial vs. Punishment: Strategies Shape War, but War Itself Affects Strategies," MPRA Paper 81418, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Cheng Li & Christopher Cotton, 2023. "Profiling restrictions in a model of law enforcement and strategic crime," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 511-532, June.
    20. Mohammad E. Nikoofal & Jun Zhuang, 2012. "Robust Allocation of a Defensive Budget Considering an Attacker's Private Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(5), pages 930-943, May.

    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:gam:jgames:v:14:y:2023:i:1:p:12-:d:1051042. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.