SEARCH · Searcharxiv

Search Searcharxiv

Search indexed arXiv papers on artificial intelligence, large language models, computer vision and robotics. Read source abstracts and follow links to arXiv.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources

arXiv2026

LangBP: Language-Guided Reasoning and Acting for Joint Bidding and Pricing

Auto-bidding is a long-horizon sequential decision problem for maximizing conversion value under budget and key performance indicator (KPI) constraints. Recent work extends this task from bidding alone to joint bidding and pricing, where a policy controls bidding decisions and pricing corrections. Existing methods mainly rely on numerical trajectory modeling, which offers limited support for interpreting campaign context and expressing high-level strategies. Large language models (LLMs) can complement this paradigm with their reasoning capabilities. However, existing language-guided methods have two limitations. First, they condition actions on language strategies without modeling the corresponding state changes, making it difficult to distinguish errors in strategy understanding from errors in action generation. Second, different instructions can produce similar execution effects, leading to imbalanced policy updates across effects. We propose LangBP, a hierarchical framework for language-guided joint bidding and pricing. LangBP's Semantic Decision Transformer (S-DT) predicts target states from the instruction and the trajectory history, then recovers the joint action via inverse dynamics. We further propose Execution-Grouped Policy Optimization (EGPO), which scores candidate effects with a Context--Effect Verifier (CEV) and balances policy updates across effect groups. Experiments on AuctionNet show that LangBP outperforms strong baselines, and online A/B tests further demonstrate business gains in real-world deployment on a large-scale e-commerce platform.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Test-time Reinforcement Learning in Imperfect Information Games

Test-time reasoning has significantly improved performance in domains ranging from games to language models. However, test-time policy changes with formal guarantees on the performance of the resulting strategy remain a challenge in two-player zero-sum imperfect-information games. Existing solutions are limited to tabular methods or single gradient step updates. In this work, we investigate policy-gradient algorithms as a method for scalable test-time reasoning. We extend the concept of gadget game, tabular technique for test-time search, to the reinforcement learning setting. Unlike prior approaches, we represent the gadget game implicitly by modified sampling and neural policy rather then explicitly by constructing it, thereby removing constraints on subgame size. Furthermore, we formally prove that, unlike prior tabular algorithms, regularized policy-gradient algorithms limit possible strategy degradation caused by test-time reasoning, even without the gadget games. Our evaluation across small- and large-scale games confirms that additional test-time training often substantially improves performance relative to the blueprint strategy.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Reaching Fairness by Reallocating Goods

Fair allocation of indivisible goods has largely been studied under the assumption that no prior allocation exists. Motivated by practical settings with pre-existing (and possibly unfair) allocations, we study how to achieve fairness through limited reallocations. Building on recent work on reformability/reallocations, we consider three fairness notions---envy-freeness (EF), envy-freeness up to one good (EF1), and envy-freeness up to any good (EFX)---and optimize the number of goods reallocated. We analyze both the classical and parameterized complexity of these problems, providing a comprehensive analysis across multiple fairness notions.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Bidding Games with Rewards: Taming Infinite Configuration Space

Bidding games are graph games in which a token is placed on a vertex, each player starts with an initial budget, and a simultaneous auction determines which player moves the token; the players' budgets are then updated accordingly. Motivated by scenarios such as resource-allocation systems in which agents receive periodic rewards (e.g., credits, energy) while competing for control, we introduce and study bidding games with rewards, in which, at each vertex, players may receive additional budget, incentivizing desired behaviors. We focus on reachability discrete poorman bidding games with rewards (DPBGr). The main challenge when compared to discrete bidding games without rewards is that the configuration graph is infinite. To this end we introduce a novel technique to eliminate plays with suboptimal infixes. This enables focusing on a finite part of the infinite configuration graph in order to solve the game via approximation to continuous bidding games with overall complexity in EXP. Finally, we discuss a new type of strategy, usable on a subclass of DPBGr, which guarantee a winning strategy for the reachability player. Membership in this subclass is shown to be in NP.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Constrained Fair Allocations via Partition Matroid Reductions

We study fair allocation of indivisible goods under additive valuations and matroid constraints. A challenging open question is whether a complete and feasible envy-free up to one good (EF1) allocation exists under every matroid that admits a complete and feasible allocation. The state-of-the-art result by Biswas and Barman [2018] positively resolves this question for partition matroids. Our first result positively resolves it for laminar matroids, which generalize partition matroids, when there are three agents. Our technique reduces this general existence question to finding an EF1 allocation satisfying a mild additional condition under a single finite-sized key laminar matroid, and we establish the required allocation by case analysis. We show that our technique somewhat extends to four agents, reducing the analogous problem to finding EF1 allocations under two finite-sized laminar matroids, although we are unable to establish their existence. We also use recent matroid decomposition results to establish EF1 existence under broader classes of matroids. Specifically, we show that EF1 allocations always exist under transversal matroids whenever a complete allocation is feasible, and obtain existence results for graphic matroids and gammoids under stronger assumptions.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Constant Individual Regret in General Games

Uncoupled no-regret dynamics provide a decentralized route to equilibrium, but prior guarantees for individual regret retain a polylogarithmic dependence on the horizon. We remove this dependence for every finite $N$-player normal-form game under full-information feedback. We introduce \emph{ECHO-OFTRL}: optimistic follow-the-regularized-leader (OFTRL) equipped with an EMA cascade for high-order optimism (ECHO), where EMA denotes exponential moving average. The algorithm is deterministic and fully uncoupled. If $m_{\max}$ denotes the largest action-set size, then, simultaneously for every horizon $T\geq1$, it guarantees that each of the $N$ players in the game incurs regret upper bounded by $O(\textrm{poly}(N, \log m_{\max}))$. Our algorithm leverages a new form of optimism inspired by modern filter design.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Rock, Paper, Scissors, ... Dynamite - A Model of Disruption from New Technologies

We seek to understand the effect of adding disruptive highly-capable new technologies to competitions by assessing the addition of Dynamite to Rock-Paper-Scissors. We find that providing a versatile Dynamite move to only one player provides limited value (win probability increases from 50% to 55.5%) and is played rarely. That value decreases further if the game is expanded beyond just the original three moves. We also observe several mechanisms by which prior moves can become strategically unplayable, or obsolete. We hope that this model illustrates some non-intuitive aspects of developing new versatile technologies. We also hope that it illustrates some pitfalls for developers and integrators to avoid in order to create value rather than merely capability.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2026

Nash Core in Multiwinner Election

In the approval-based committee selection problem, a committee is said to be in the core if no subset of voters has an incentive to deviate by selecting a \emph{blocking} committee of proportional size, such that every voter in the deviating group strictly prefers the blocking committee. We consider the setting where candidates can be selected fractionally. Under a mild regularity assumption, we show that there always exists a weighting of candidates such that the fractional committee maximizing the candidate-weighted Nash Social Welfare is in the core. We refer to such a solution as being in the \emph{Nash core}. Additionally, we show that a Nash core solution admits a payment assignment between voters and candidates, where each voter pays a candidate they approve in proportion to the weight. For the discrete setting, where each candidate is either included or excluded from the committee, we prove that every approval-based committee election with at most eight equally weighted voters has a core committee by rounding the fractional Nash core solution. Although the non-emptiness of the core in this setting remains an open question and checking core membership is coNP-hard, we extend the notion of the Nash core to the discrete case, yielding a formulation that is efficiently verifiable and offers a promising path toward establishing core existence in discrete settings. Finally, we test our approach on real voting data using a payment-guided heuristic. We empirically show that the Nash core solution can be efficiently computed through an iterative algorithm in both the fractional and discrete settings.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Truthful AI Advisors: A Pre-Specified Benchmark for Large Language Model Honesty Under Preference Misalignment

Large language models are increasingly deployed as advisors whose objective is not aligned with the user's: recommenders optimize for engagement, sales assistants for purchases. Whether they stay truthful when honesty conflicts with their own payoff is a core alignment question. We turn the canonical Crawford-Sobel cheap-talk model into a pre-specified benchmark for LLM honesty under preference misalignment, in which theory supplies an exact oracle. A sender observes a state omega in [0,1], wants the receiver's action near omega+b, and sends one costless message to a receiver whose ideal action is omega. For the positive-bias grid b in {0.01,0.04,0.08,0.12} the exact most-informative partition sizes are 7,4,3,2, with oracle normalized mutual information 0.5294, 0.3268, 0.2205, 0.1829. Extending a pre-registered 4-model run of 12,000 sender calls to eight models across two capability tiers and 39,569 logged calls, all models over-reveal relative to the most-informative equilibrium by 1.8 to 4.5x: pooled normalized mutual information stays at 0.82-0.96 where the oracle prescribes 0.18-0.53. Informativeness declines with bias as predicted (beta = -1.71, t = -7.50) but never approaches the strategic optimum; rather than coarse partitions, models show near-full revelation with a constant upward offset tracking their bias (linear exaggeration). A structural hint separates capability from propensity: told the equilibrium partition size, reasoning models state a correct Crawford-Sobel cell in 0.20-0.99 of messages while the non-reasoning tier never exceeds 0.005. The capability is present but goes unexercised unless asked for, locating the failure in propensity rather than competence. A decoder ablation shows the finding is recoverable only when the receiver reads the sender's stated number: an embedding-only decoder mis-reads the same data as near-babbling.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Reaching as Cheap as Possible in 1-clock Robust Weighted Timed Games

The value problem for 2-player games on graph generally consists in determining the minimal value Min can ensure against any possible strategy for Max. We consider here the value problem for reachability objectives in weighted timed games (WTGs) under a robust semantics. WTGs are a modelling formalism combining real-time constraints and integer weights on transitions and locations in an adversarial setting. Robustness allows for representing timing imprecisions in the measurement of delays and clock values. Robust weighted timed games have been introduced more than a decade ago: they are undecidable in general, and were quite recently shown decidable for the subclasses of acyclic or divergent robust WTGs. This paper pursues the goal of identifying decidable subclasses and establishes the decidability of the robust value problem for 1-clock WTGs.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Individual Rationality in Constrained Hedonic Games: Friends, Enemies, and Neutrals

We study constrained coalition formation in games induced by friends, enemies, and neutrals, under the two standard refinements of additively separable preferences: friend-oriented and enemy-oriented. We ask for partitions that are individually rational (IR), while additionally requiring exactly $k$ non-empty coalitions, each satisfying a prescribed lower and upper bound on its size. Although IR alone is trivial to satisfy for any hedonic game, the size constraints make it computationally intractable to decide whether a feasible partition exists. The two models tell strikingly different stories. Under enemy-oriented preferences, the problem collapses to size-constrained graph coloring, and its complexity follows accordingly. Under friend-oriented preferences, however, the picture is far more intricate, and is governed by the enmity structure rather than the friendships. The complexity is further shaped by two factors: how strict the imposed size requirements are, and whether relationships are symmetric or asymmetric, with several cases turning out tractable in the symmetric setting but intractable once asymmetry is allowed. Charting this boundary in terms of both classical and parameterized complexity, we provide a complete understanding of which properties of the friend/enemy structure are responsible for hardness.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Sample Complexity of the Second-Best Bilateral Trade

We study the sample complexity of learning near-optimal bilateral trade mechanisms. Unlike previous work on learning simple or fixed-price bilateral-trade mechanisms, we focus on mechanisms satisfying Bayesian incentive compatibility (BIC), interim individual rationality (IIR), and ex-ante weak budget balance (WBB). In other words, our target is to design a sample-based mechanism that achieves the second-best gains-from-trade benchmark. We give matching or nearly matching upper and lower bounds in three regimes. For regular product distributions on $[0,h]^2$, additive $\varepsilon$-approximation has sample complexity $\widetildeΘ(h^2/\varepsilon^2)$. For multiplicative $(1-α)$-approximation under the same assumptions, we find that the sample complexity is $\widetildeΘ(h/(\mathrm{SB}(D)α^2))$, which is benchmark-sensitive with unavoidable dependence on the second-best gains from trade $\mathrm{SB}(D)$. We also investigate unbounded distributions under a monotone hazard rate (MHR) assumption. The sample complexity depends on the ratio $χ_μ(D)=μ(D)/\mathrm{SB}(D)$, where $μ(D)$ is the sum of the buyer's expected value and the seller's expected cost.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Fair Division Under Boolean Valuations: Beyond Normalization

We study fair division of indivisible items when agents have arbitrary two-level preferences: the value of each agent for any set of items is Boolean, which need not be monotone or additive. Notably, we do not impose the standard assumption of normalization, i.e., different agents may value the empty set at different Boolean levels. Since the preferences are nonmonotone, envy-freeness up to one item (EF1) and envy-freeness up to any item (EFX) each admit several variants, depending on which items are tested for removal and whether they are removed from the envious agent's bundle or the envied agent's bundle. This paper investigates the existence of these variants of EF1 and EFX, on their own and together with economic efficiency, incentive compatibility, feasibility constraints, and lottery-based randomization. Our results highlight that the existence landscape depends crucially on the number of normalized agents, who value the empty bundle at the lower Boolean level. The authors used significant assistance from GPT-5.6-Sol for deriving theoretical results, verified any AI-generated proofs for correctness, and expanded on the exposition and simplified arguments, with the aid of GPT-5.6-Sol and Claude Opus 5.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Fair Division of Graphs: Beyond Traceability

In this paper, we study fair division problems in which resources are structured as graphs and agents must receive connected bundles. This connectivity requirement fundamentally alters the problem, making it significantly more challenging than its classical counterpart. We focus on the fairness notion of $\mathrm{EF1}_{\mathrm{outer}}$, where envy can be eliminated by removing at most one vertex whose deletion does not disconnect the bundle -- a critical constraint for applications such as land division and network allocation. Our first result extends prior work by establishing the existence of $\mathrm{EF1}_{\mathrm{outer}}$ allocations for an infinite family of non-traceable graphs (that is, graphs that do not admit a Hamiltonian path), answering a central open question and generalizing Bilò et al.'s result for traceable graphs. We then make progress on a conjecture concerning the $\mathrm{EF1}_{\mathrm{outer}}$ spectrum of trees due to Chen and Zwicker. Finally, we complement our structural results with algorithmic insights, showing that deciding the existence of an $\mathrm{EF1}_{\mathrm{outer}}$ allocation is NP-complete even for binary additive valuations, thereby resolving an open complexity question. Taken together, our results deepen the connection between graph theory and fair division, and offer new tools for studying fairness in structured resource environments.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Equilibria in Network Constrained Markets with System Operator

We study a networked economic system composed of $n$ producers supplying a single homogeneous good to a number of geographically separated markets and of a centralized authority, called the market maker. Producers compete à la Cournot, by choosing the quantities of good to supply to each market they have access to in order to maximize their profit. Every market is characterized by its inverse demand functions returning the unit price of the considered good as a function of the total available quantity. Markets are interconnected by a dispatch network through which quantities of the considered good can flow within finite capacity constraints and possibly satisfying additional linear physical constraints. Such flows are determined by the action of a system operator, who aims at maximizing a designated welfare function. We model such competition as a strategic game with $n+1$ players: the producers and the system operator. For this game, we first establish the existence of pure-strategy Nash equilibria under standard concavity assumptions. We then identify sufficient conditions for the game to be exact potential with an essentially unique Nash equilibrium. Next, we present a general result that connects the optimal action of the system operator with the capacity constraints imposed on the network. For the commonly used Walrasian welfare, our finding proves a connection between capacity bottlenecks in the market network and the emergence of price differences between markets separated by saturated lines. This phenomenon is frequently observed in real-world scenarios, for instance in power networks. Finally, we validate the model with data from the Italian day-ahead electricity market.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Level-2 Inverse Games for Inferring Agents' Estimates of Others' Objectives

Effectively interpreting strategic interactions among multiple agents requires us to infer each agent's objective from limited information. Existing inverse game-theoretic approaches frame this challenge in terms of a "level-1" inference problem, in which we take the perspective of a third-party observer and assume that individual agents share complete knowledge of one another's objectives. However, this assumption breaks down in decentralized, real-world scenarios like urban driving and bargaining, in which agents may act based on conflicting views of one another's objectives. We demonstrate the necessity of inferring agents' different estimates of each other's objectives through empirical examples, and by theoretically characterizing the prediction error of level-1 inference on fictitious gameplay data from linear-quadratic games. To address this fundamental issue, we propose a framework for level-2 inference to address the question: "What does each agent believe about other agents' objectives?" We prove that the level-2 inference problem is non-convex even in benign settings like linear-quadratic games, and we develop an efficient gradient-based approach for identifying local solutions. Experiments on a synthetic urban driving example show that our approach uncovers nuanced misalignments that level-1 methods miss.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Aspiration-based Perturbed Learning Automata in Weakly-Acyclic Games with Noisy Utility Measurements

Reinforcement-based learning dynamics may exhibit several limitations when applied in a distributed setup. In (repeatedly-played) multi-player/action strategic-form games, and when each player applies an independent copy of the learning dynamics, convergence to (usually desirable) pure Nash equilibria cannot be guaranteed. Prior work has only focused on a small class of games, namely potential and coordination games. Furthermore, strong convergence guarantees (i.e., almost sure convergence or weak convergence) are mostly restricted to two-player games. To address this main limitation of reinforcement-based learning in repeatedly-played strategic-form games, this paper introduces a novel payoff-based learning scheme for distributed optimization in multi-player/action strategic-form games. We present an extension of perturbed learning automata (PLA), namely aspiration-based perturbed learning automata (APLA), in which each player's probability distribution for selecting actions is reinforced both by repeated selection and an aspiration factor that captures the player's satisfaction level. We provide a stochastic stability analysis of APLA in multi-player positive-utility weakly-acyclic games under the presence of noisy observations. We provide conditions under which convergence is attained (in weak sense) to the set of pure Nash equilibria. A methodology is also derived for calculating the stochastically stable equilibria through the aspiration action functional minimization, which simplifies the derivation of stochastically stable states. Conditions can then be derived for convergence to the Pareto efficient Nash equilibria. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reinforcement-based learning scheme that provides global convergence guarantees in weakly-acyclic games and in a fully-distributed setup. A Monte-Carlo simulation study validates the derived conclusions.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Performance Manipulation: Labor Market Implications in AI-assisted Era

Performance manipulation arises when agents exploit easily measurable, routine tasks to inflate observable outcomes without contributing genuine innovation or expert judgment. We formalize this phenomenon in a game-theoretic model in which agents allocate effort along two margins. Creative effort is non-routine cognitive labor whose return is complementary to the agent's private expertise; it is the scarce input that principals seek. Mechanistic effort is the execution of well-defined, rule-based tasks that raise performance independently of expertise, a commoditized input that AI heavily augments. We establish the existence of a symmetric, monotone pure-strategy equilibrium and show that performance-based screening remains viable so long as evaluations retain a sufficient creative component, but collapses into an uninformative pooling equilibrium once AI capability grows large enough to crowd out creative effort. Comparing contest allocations against a single-agent baseline isolates performance manipulation as the competition-induced over-investment in mechanistic effort, which we show is undertaken systematically by low-type agents but not high-type ones. We further prove that more sharply skewed reward structures mitigate this friction by eliciting greater creative effort across the participant pool. Finally, using a novel, language-model-based methodology to measure both effort types from nearly 1,500 Kaggle competition scripts, we provide robust empirical support for the model's predictions.

econ.GN↗