Bary Pradelski

Bary S. R. Pradelski, Bassel Tarbush

In a satisficing equilibrium each agent $i$ plays one of her top $k_i$ actions in response to the actions of the other agents. Our concept unifies models of bounded rationality and yields predictions that differ from canonical solution concepts. We study its theoretical properties and show that it provides sharp predictions, exists in most games as well as in a broad new class of economic environments, admits standard epistemic and dynamic foundations, and is empirically falsifiable.

Davide Legacci, Panayotis Mertikopoulos, Bary Pradelski

In view of the complexity of the dynamics of learning in games, we seek to decompose a game into simpler components where the dynamics' long-run behavior is well understood. A natural starting point for this is Helmholtz's theorem, which decomposes a vector field into a potential and an incompressible component. However, the geometry of game dynamics - and, in particular, the dynamics of exponential / multiplicative weights (EW) schemes - is not compatible with the Euclidean underpinnings of Helmholtz's theorem. This leads us to consider a specific Riemannian framework based on the so-called Shahshahani metric, and introduce the class of incompressible games, for which we establish the following results: First, in addition to being volume-preserving, the continuous-time EW dynamics in incompressible games admit a constant of motion and are Poincaré recurrent - i.e., almost every trajectory of play comes arbitrarily close to its starting point infinitely often. Second, we establish a deep connection with a well-known decomposition of games into a potential and harmonic component (where the players' objectives are aligned and anti-aligned respectively): a game is incompressible if and only if it is harmonic, implying in turn that the EW dynamics lead to Poincaré recurrence in harmonic games.

Davide Legacci, Panayotis Mertikopoulos, Christos H. Papadimitriou et al.

The long-run behavior of multi-agent learning - and, in particular, no-regret learning - is relatively well-understood in potential games, where players have aligned interests. By contrast, in harmonic games - the strategic counterpart of potential games, where players have conflicting interests - very little is known outside the narrow subclass of 2-player zero-sum games with a fully-mixed equilibrium. Our paper seeks to partially fill this gap by focusing on the full class of (generalized) harmonic games and examining the convergence properties of follow-the-regularized-leader (FTRL), the most widely studied class of no-regret learning schemes. As a first result, we show that the continuous-time dynamics of FTRL are Poincaré recurrent, that is, they return arbitrarily close to their starting point infinitely often, and hence fail to converge. In discrete time, the standard, "vanilla" implementation of FTRL may lead to even worse outcomes, eventually trapping the players in a perpetual cycle of best-responses. However, if FTRL is augmented with a suitable extrapolation step - which includes as special cases the optimistic and mirror-prox variants of FTRL - we show that learning converges to a Nash equilibrium from any initial condition, and all players are guaranteed at most O(1) regret. These results provide an in-depth understanding of no-regret learning in harmonic games, nesting prior work on 2-player zero-sum games, and showing at a high level that harmonic games are the canonical complement of potential games, not only from a strategic, but also from a dynamic viewpoint.

Anay Mehrotra, Bary S. R. Pradelski, Nisheeth K. Vishnoi

In selection processes such as hiring, promotion, and college admissions, implicit bias toward socially-salient attributes such as race, gender, or sexual orientation of candidates is known to produce persistent inequality and reduce aggregate utility for the decision maker. Interventions such as the Rooney Rule and its generalizations, which require the decision maker to select at least a specified number of individuals from each affected group, have been proposed to mitigate the adverse effects of implicit bias in selection. Recent works have established that such lower-bound constraints can be very effective in improving aggregate utility in the case when each individual belongs to at most one affected group. However, in several settings, individuals may belong to multiple affected groups and, consequently, face more extreme implicit bias due to this intersectionality. We consider independently drawn utilities and show that, in the intersectional case, the aforementioned non-intersectional constraints can only recover part of the total utility achievable in the absence of implicit bias. On the other hand, we show that if one includes appropriate lower-bound constraints on the intersections, almost all the utility achievable in the absence of implicit bias can be recovered. Thus, intersectional constraints can offer a significant advantage over a reductionist dimension-by-dimension non-intersectional approach to reducing inequality.