Skip to main content

Verification of Strong Nash-equilibrium for Probabilistic BAR Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Formal Methods and Software Engineering (ICFEM 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 11232))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Verifying whether rational participants in a BAR system (a distributed system including Byzantine, Altruistic and Rational participants) would deviate from the specified behaviour is important but challenging. Existing works consider this as Nash-equilibrium verification in a multi-player game. If the game is probabilistic and non-terminating, verifying whether a coalition of rational players would deviate becomes even more challenging. There is no automatic verification algorithm to address it. In this article, we propose a formalization to capture that coalitions of rational players do not deviate, following the concept of Strong Nash-equilibrium (SNE) in game-theory, and propose a model checking algorithm to automatically verify SNE of non-terminating probabilistic BAR systems. We implemented a prototype and evaluated the algorithm in three case studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Here, game refers to the atomic concept of Game Theory, defined as the study of mathematical models of conflict and cooperation between intelligent and rational decision-maker agents.

  2. 2.

    In BAR model, the agents are divided in three categories, altruistic, rational or Byzantine. Only altruistic agents follow the system specification.

  3. 3.

    We do not need to consider the case of \(\emptyset \) as there is no probability in this case.

  4. 4.

    Essentially, \(\mathsf{P}^{\pi }_{\varLambda }\) projects each action to a part of it.

  5. 5.

    Note that the rational players are exactly players in the coalition, capturing that the rational players assume the unknown players (not in C) are altruistic by default.

  6. 6.

    In this example, it happens (uncommonly) that given any fixed choice of \(d_1\) and \(d_2\), that \(d_3\) chooses the lowest price p leads to the guaranteed pay-off of \(d_1\) and \(d_2\) in every case.

  7. 7.

    \(a_C\) is short for \(\mathsf{p}(a,C)\), \(a_L\) is short hand for \(\mathsf{p}(a,L) \).

References

  1. Abraham, I., Dolev, D., Gonen, R., Halpern, J.: Distributed computing meets game theory: robust mechanisms for rational secret sharing and multiparty computation. In: Proceedings of 25th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 53–62 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aiyer, A., Alvisi, L., Clement, A., Dahlin, M., Martin, J.P., Porth, C.: BAR fault tolerance for cooperative services. In: Proceedings of 20th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pp. 45–58 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Backes, M., Ciobotaru, O., Krohmer, A.: RatFish: a file sharing protocol provably secure against rational users. In: Gritzalis, D., Preneel, B., Theoharidou, M. (eds.) ESORICS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6345, pp. 607–625. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15497-3_37

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Brenguier, R.: PRALINE: a tool for computing nash equilibria in concurrent games. In: Sharygina, N., Veith, H. (eds.) CAV 2013. LNCS, vol. 8044, pp. 890–895. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39799-8_63

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen, T., Forejt, V., Kwiatkowska, M., Parker, D., Simaitis, A.: PRISM-games: a model checker for stochastic multi-player games. In: Piterman, N., Smolka, S.A. (eds.) TACAS 2013. LNCS, vol. 7795, pp. 185–191. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36742-7_13

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Coello, C.C.: A comprehensive survey of evolutionary-based multiobjective optimization techniques. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 1(3), 129–156 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Diamond, G., Rozanski, A., Steuer, M.: Playing doctor: application of game theory to medical decision-making. J. Chron. Diseases 39, 669–677 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fernando, D., Dong, N., Jegourel, C., Dong, J.: Verification of strong Nash-equilibrium in probabilistic BAR systems(extended with proof). https://sites.google.com/view/verify-pbar

  9. Fernando, D., Dong, N., Jegourel, C., Dong, J.: Verification of Nash-equilibrium for probabilistic BAR systems. In: ICECCS, pp. 53–62 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Halpern, J., Teague, V.: Rational secret sharing and multiparty computation: extended abstract. In: Proceedings of 36th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 623–632 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kiayias, A., Koutsoupias, E., Kyropoulou, M., Tselekounis, Y.: Blockchain mining games. In: Proceedings of 2016 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, pp. 365–382 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kwiatkowska, M., Parker, D., Wiltsche, C.: PRISM-games 2.0: a tool for multi-objective strategy synthesis for stochastic games. In: Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, pp. 560–566 (2016)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Leibo, J., Zambaldi, V., Lanctot, M., Marecki, J., Graepel, T.: Multi-agent reinforcement learning in sequential social dilemmas. In: Proceedings of 16th Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, pp. 464–473 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lillibridge, M., Elnikety, S., Birrell, A., Burrows, M., Isard, M.: A cooperative internet backup scheme. In: Proceedings of the General Track: 2003 USENIX Annual Technical Conference, pp. 29–41 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mari, F., et al.: Model checking Nash equilibria in MAD distributed systems. In: Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design, pp. 1–8 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mari, F., et al.: Model checking coalition Nash equilibria in MAD distributed systems. In: Guerraoui, R., Petit, F. (eds.) SSS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5873, pp. 531–546. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-05118-0_37

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. McNaughton, R.: Infinite games played on finite graphs. Ann. Pure Appl. Log. 65(2), 149–184 (1993)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Mouaddib, A.I., Boussard, M., Bouzid, M.: Towards a formal framework for multi-objective multiagent planning. In: Proceedings of 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, p. 123 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Shinohara, R.: Coalition-proof equilibria in a voluntary participation game. Int. J. Game Theory 39(4), 603–615 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Shneidman, J., Parkes, D.C.: Specification faithfulness in networks with rational nodes. In: Proceedings of 23rd Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 88–97 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Toumi, A., Gutierrez, J., Wooldridge, M.: A tool for the automated verification of Nash equilibria in concurrent games. In: Leucker, M., Rueda, C., Valencia, F.D. (eds.) ICTAC 2015. LNCS, vol. 9399, pp. 583–594. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25150-9_34

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This research is supported by the National Research Foundation, Prime Minister’s Office, Singapore under its Corporate Laboratory@University Scheme, National University of Singapore, and Singapore Telecommunications Ltd.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dileepa Fernando .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Fernando, D., Dong, N., Jegourel, C., Dong, J.S. (2018). Verification of Strong Nash-equilibrium for Probabilistic BAR Systems. In: Sun, J., Sun, M. (eds) Formal Methods and Software Engineering. ICFEM 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11232. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02450-5_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02450-5_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02449-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02450-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics