I was reading Noam Nisan's exposition of correlated equilibria. It's interesting to note that finding a correlated equilibrium is easy: you have to solve a linear program in the relevant variables of the underlying distribution. This is in contrast to Nash equilibria.
What struck me is that this is a good example of where a joint distribution isn't that bad. In machine learning especially, trying to "learn" a joint distribution is hard firstly because the number of variables blows up, and because of nasty correlations that one has to account for. In fact, the area of variational methods often uses the trick of replacing a joint distribution by the "closest" product distribution, and optimizing over that instead.
Here though, the "replacing by a product distribution" takes you from a correlated equilibrium problem to a Nash equilibrium problem, and now the individual probabilities actually multiply, yielding a nonlinear problem that's PPAD-Complete.
Ruminations on computational geometry, algorithms, theoretical computer science and life
Showing posts with label game theory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label game theory. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Joint distributions aren't that bad
Labels:
distributions,
game theory,
research
Friday, April 10, 2009
Is HAM SANDWICH PPAD-Complete ?
Reading the algorithmic game theory book, I discover that HAM SANDWICH is in PPAD (not surprising in retrospect when you think of Brouwer's fixed point theorem as the canonical PPAD problem). Is HAM SANDWICH PPAD-Complete ?
Update: I should clarify - this is the problem I'm referring to:
In 2D, the problem is to bisect two sets (the ham and the bread).
Update: I should clarify - this is the problem I'm referring to:
Given n sets of 2n points (each) in n dimensions, is there a single hyperplane that bisects each set (i.e divides it into two sets of size n).
In 2D, the problem is to bisect two sets (the ham and the bread).
Labels:
game theory,
geometry,
PPAD
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)