IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/eee/gamchp/v4y2015icp779-810.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

The Complexity of Computing Equilibria

Author

Listed:
  • Papadimitriou, Christos

Abstract

In one of the most influential existence theorems in mathematics, John F. Nash proved in 1950 that any normal form game has an equilibrium. More than five decades later, it was shown that the computational task of finding such an equilibrium is intractable, that is, unlikely to be carried out within any feasible time limits for large enough games. This chapter develops the necessary background and formalism from the theory of algorithms and complexity developed in computer science, in order to understand this result, its context, its proof, and its implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Papadimitriou, Christos, 2015. "The Complexity of Computing Equilibria," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamchp:v:4:y:2015:i:c:p:779-810
    DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53766-9.00014-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780444537669000148
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/B978-0-444-53766-9.00014-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John C. Harsanyi & Reinhard Selten, 1988. "A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262582384, April.
    2. Tim Roughgarden, 2010. "Computing equilibria: a computational complexity perspective," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 42(1), pages 193-236, January.
    3. Aumann, Robert J., 1974. "Subjectivity and correlation in randomized strategies," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 67-96, March.
    4. Velupillai, K., 2000. "Computable Economics: The Arne Ryde Memorial Lectures," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198295273.
    5. Koller, Daphne & Megiddo, Nimrod & von Stengel, Bernhard, 1996. "Efficient Computation of Equilibria for Extensive Two-Person Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 247-259, June.
    6. R. Myerson, 2010. "Nash Equilibrium and the History of Economic Theory," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 6.
    7. John Geanakoplos, 2003. "Nash and Walras equilibrium via Brouwer," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 21(2), pages 585-603, March.
    8. Blonski, Matthias, 1999. "Anonymous Games with Binary Actions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 171-180, August.
    9. Koller, Daphne & Megiddo, Nimrod, 1992. "The complexity of two-person zero-sum games in extensive form," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 528-552, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Agha Mohammad Ali Kermani, Mehrdad & Fatemi Ardestani, Seyed Farshad & Aliahmadi, Alireza & Barzinpour, Farnaz, 2017. "A novel game theoretic approach for modeling competitive information diffusion in social networks with heterogeneous nodes," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 466(C), pages 570-582.
    2. Nicola, Gatti & Mario, Gilli & Fabio, Panozzo, 2016. "Further results on verification problems in extensive-form games," Working Papers 347, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 15 Jul 2016.
    3. Ilan Nehama, 2016. "Analyzing Games with Ambiguous Player Types Using the MINthenMAX Decision Model," Discussion Paper Series dp700, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.

    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. Bernhard von Stengel & Antoon van den Elzen & Dolf Talman, 2002. "Computing Normal Form Perfect Equilibria for Extensive Two-Person Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 693-715, March.
    2. Tim Roughgarden, 2018. "Complexity Theory, Game Theory, and Economics: The Barbados Lectures," Papers 1801.00734, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2020.
    3. Barbara Dluhosch, 2011. "European Economics at a Crossroads, by J. Barkley Rosser, Jr., Richard P. F. Holt, and David Colander," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 629-631, August.
    4. Bernhard von Stengel & Antoon van den Elzen & Dolf Talman, 2002. "Computing Normal Form Perfect Equilibria for Extensive Two-Person Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 693-715, March.
    5. P. Herings & Ronald Peeters, 2010. "Homotopy methods to compute equilibria in game theory," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 42(1), pages 119-156, January.
    6. Bernhard von Stengel & Françoise Forges, 2008. "Extensive-Form Correlated Equilibrium: Definition and Computational Complexity," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1002-1022, November.
    7. J. Barkley Rosser Jr & Richard P.F. Holt & David Colander, 2010. "European Economics at a Crossroads," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13585.
    8. F. Forges & B. von Stengel, 2002. "Computionally Efficient Coordination in Games Trees," THEMA Working Papers 2002-05, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    9. Roger B. Myerson, 2009. "Learning from Schelling's Strategy of Conflict," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(4), pages 1109-1125, December.
    10. Konstantinos Georgalos & Indrajit Ray & Sonali SenGupta, 2020. "Nash versus coarse correlation," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 1178-1204, December.
    11. Antonio Cabrales & Michalis Drouvelis & Zeynep Gurguy & Indrajit Ray, 2017. "Transparency is Overrated: Communicating in a Coordination Game with Private Information," CESifo Working Paper Series 6781, CESifo.
    12. Sung, Shao-Chin & Dimitrov, Dinko, 2010. "Computational complexity in additive hedonic games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(3), pages 635-639, June.
    13. Hendrik Vollmer, 2013. "What kind of game is everyday interaction?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 25(3), pages 370-404, August.
    14. R. J. Aumann & J. H. Dreze, 2009. "Assessing Strategic Risk," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 1-16, February.
    15. Güth, Werner & Kocher, Martin G., 2014. "More than thirty years of ultimatum bargaining experiments: Motives, variations, and a survey of the recent literature," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 396-409.
    16. Kets, W. & Voorneveld, M., 2007. "Congestion, Equilibrium and Learning : The Minority Game," Other publications TiSEM 49539a1f-2921-4dd9-83a0-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2018. "Bayesian game theorists and non-Bayesian players," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 1420-1454, November.
    18. Tim Roughgarden, 2010. "Computing equilibria: a computational complexity perspective," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 42(1), pages 193-236, January.
    19. Ehud Kalai & Dov Samet, 1986. "Are Bayesian-Nash Incentives and Implementations Perfect?," Discussion Papers 680, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    20. Vincent P. Crawford, 2016. "New Directions for Modelling Strategic Behavior: Game-Theoretic Models of Communication, Coordination, and Cooperation in Economic Relationships," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(4), pages 131-150, Fall.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Normal form games; Nash equilibrium; Algorithms; Computational complexity; Polynomial-time algorithms; NP-complete problems; PPAD-complete problems;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eee:gamchp:v:4:y:2015:i:c:p:779-810. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/bookseriesdescription.cws_home/BS_HE/description .

    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.