Improving resource allocation strategies against human adversaries in security games: An extended study
Author
dc.contributor.author
Yang, Rong
Author
dc.contributor.author
Kiekintveld, Christopher
es_CL
Author
dc.contributor.author
Ordóñez Pizarro, Fernando
es_CL
Author
dc.contributor.author
Tambe, Milind
es_CL
Author
dc.contributor.author
John, Richard
es_CL
Admission date
dc.date.accessioned
2014-02-06T19:32:03Z
Available date
dc.date.available
2014-02-06T19:32:03Z
Publication date
dc.date.issued
2013
Cita de ítem
dc.identifier.citation
Artificial Intelligence 195 (2013) 440–469
en_US
Identifier
dc.identifier.other
doi 10.1016/j.artint.2012.11.004
Identifier
dc.identifier.uri
https://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/126376
General note
dc.description
Artículo de publicación ISI
en_US
Abstract
dc.description.abstract
Stackelberg games have garnered significant attention in recent years given their deployment
for real world security. Most of these systems, such as ARMOR, IRIS and GUARDS
have adopted the standard game-theoretical assumption that adversaries are perfectly rational,
which is standard in the game theory literature. This assumption may not hold in
real-world security problems due to the bounded rationality of human adversaries, which
could potentially reduce the effectiveness of these systems.
In this paper, we focus on relaxing the unrealistic assumption of perfectly rational adversary
in Stackelberg security games. In particular, we present new mathematical models of
human adversaries’ behavior, based on using two fundamental theory/method in human
decision making: Prospect Theory (PT) and stochastic discrete choice model. We also provide
methods for tuning the parameters of these new models. Additionally, we propose
a modification of the standard quantal response based model inspired by rank-dependent
expected utility theory. We then develop efficient algorithms to compute the best response
of the security forces when playing against the different models of adversaries. In order
to evaluate the effectiveness of the new models, we conduct comprehensive experiments
with human subjects using a web-based game, comparing them with models previously
proposed in the literature to address the perfect rationality assumption on part of the adversary.
Our experimental results show that the subjects’ responses follow the assumptions of
our new models more closely than the previous perfect rationality assumption. We also
show that the defender strategy produced by our new stochastic discrete choice model
outperform the previous leading contender for relaxing the assumption of perfect rationality.
Furthermore, in a separate set of experiments, we show the benefits of our modified
stochastic model (QRRU) over the standard model (QR).