Game-Theoretic Choice of Curing Rates Against Networked SIS Epidemics by Human Decision-Makers
For network epidemiology and behavioral economics, this work reveals that human misperceptions of probabilities can significantly alter optimal protection strategies in epidemic models.
This paper studies how nonlinear probability weighting, as observed in human decision-making, affects equilibrium curing rates in networked SIS epidemics. It shows that under high per-unit costs, true expectation minimizers choose zero curing, while nonlinear weighting leads to nonzero curing at equilibrium.
We study networks of human decision-makers who independently decide how to protect themselves against Susceptible-Infected-Susceptible (SIS) epidemics. Motivated by studies in behavioral economics showing that humans perceive probabilities in a nonlinear fashion, we examine the impacts of such misperceptions on the equilibrium protection strategies. In our setting, nodes choose their curing rates to minimize the infection probability under the degree-based mean-field approximation of the SIS epidemic plus the cost of their selected curing rate. We establish the existence of a degree based equilibrium under both true and nonlinear perceptions of infection probabilities (under suitable assumptions). When the per-unit cost of curing rate is sufficiently high, we show that true expectation minimizers choose the curing rate to be zero at the equilibrium, while curing rate is nonzero under nonlinear probability weighting.