Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Automation and Remote Control

Design of Rational Data Exchange Procedures in the Hierarchical Two-player Game: A Parametric Formulation

Михаил Александрович Горелов

Published Sep 1, 2003• 1 citation
Publisher
DOI
10.1023/a:1026052003159

Related papers

Rational Multiparty Computation

John Ross Wallrabenstein

The field of rational cryptography considers the design of cryptographic protocols in the presence of rational agents seeking to maximize local utility functions. This departs from the standard secure multiparty computation setting, where players are assumed to be either honest or malicious. We detail the construction of both a two-party and a multiparty game theoretic framework for constructing rational cryptographic protocols. Our framework specifies the utility function assumptions necessary to realize the privacy, correctness, and fairness guarantees for protocols. We demonstrate that our framework correctly models cryptographic protocols, such as rational secret sharing, where existing work considers equilibrium concepts that yield unreasonable equilibria. Similarly, we demonstrate that cryptography may be applied to the game theoretic domain, constructing an auction market not realizable in the original formulation. Additionally, we demonstrate that modeling players as rational agents allows us to design a protocol that destabilizes coalitions. Thus, we establish a mutual benefit from combining the two fields, while demonstrating the applicability of our framework to real-world market environments. We also give an application of game theory to adversarial interactions where cryptography is not necessary. Specifically, we consider adversarial machine learning, where the adversary is rational and reacts to the presence of a data miner. We give a general extension to classification algorithms that returns greater expected utility for the data miner than existing classification methods.

•Jan 1, 2014•1 citation

Cryptography and Game Theory: Designing Protocols for Exchanging Information

Gillat Kol, Moni Naor

Springer eBooks•Feb 25, 2008•189 citations

Bayesian rational agents in iterated quantum games

John B. DeBrota, Peter J. Love

We apply a Bayesian agent-based framework inspired by QBism to iterations of two quantum games, the CHSH game and the quantum prisoners' dilemma. In each two-player game, players hold beliefs about an amount of shared entanglement and about the actions or beliefs of the other player. Each takes actions which maximize their expected utility and revises their beliefs with the classical Bayes rule between rounds. We simulate iterated play to see if and how players can learn about the presence of shared entanglement and to explore how their performance, their beliefs, and the game's structure interrelate. In the CHSH game, we find that players can learn that entanglement is present and use this to achieve quantum advantage. We find that they can only do so if they also believe the other player will act correctly to exploit the entanglement. In the case of low or zero entanglement in the CHSH game, the players cannot achieve quantum advantage, even in the case where they believe the entanglement is higher than it is. For the prisoners dilemma, we show that assuming 1-fold rational players (rational players who believe the other player is also rational) reduces the quantum extension [Eisert, Wilkens, and Lewenstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3077 (1999)] of the prisoners dilemma to a game with only two strategies, one of which (defect) is dominant for low entanglement, and the other (the quantum strategy Q) is dominant for high entanglement. For intermediate entanglement, neither strategy is dominant. We again show that players can learn entanglement in iterated play. We also show that strong belief in entanglement causes optimal play even in the absence of entanglement -- showing that belief in entanglement is acting as a proxy for the players trusting each other. Our work points to possible future applications in resource detection and quantum algorithm design.

arXiv:2408.02058•Physical Review A•Apr 10, 2026•0 citations

Generalized Bases with a Resolution of the Identity: A Cooperative Game Theory Approach

Apostol Vourdas

Springer proceedings in mathematics & statistics•Jan 1, 2018•0 citations

Subcontracted Rational SFE

Matthew Lepinski, Silvio M. Micali

In their paper, "Rational Secure Computation and Ideal Mechanism Design," Izmalkov, Lepinski and Micali show that any one-shot mediated game can be simulated by the players themselves, without the help of a trusted mediator, using physical envelopes and a ballot-box. We show that communication between the players is not essential to the ILM protocol. That is, we provide a protocol for rational secure function evaluation (Rational SFE) where the players just send a set of envelopes to a referee who simply performs a sequence of publicly verifiable actions. That is, the players can "subcontract" all of the computation to an untrusted referee. In addition to providing a communication structure that more closely matches the ideal game, our protocol also enables us to better simulate mediated games in which abort is not a dominated action.

•Nov 2, 2005•0 citations

Characterization of Binary Constraint System Games

Richard Cleve, Rajat Mittal

Lecture notes in computer science•Jan 1, 2014•58 citations
The field of rational cryptography considers the design of cryptographic protocols in the presence of rational agents seeking to maximize local utility functions. This departs from the standard secure multiparty computation setting, where players are assumed to be either honest or malicious. We detail the construction of both a two-party and a multiparty game theoretic framework for constructing rational cryptographic protocols. Our framework specifies the utility function assumptions necessary to realize the privacy, correctness, and fairness guarantees for protocols. We demonstrate that our framework correctly models cryptographic protocols, such as rational secret sharing, where existing work considers equilibrium concepts that yield unreasonable equilibria. Similarly, we demonstrate that cryptography may be applied to the game theoretic domain, constructing an auction market not realizable in the original formulation. Additionally, we demonstrate that modeling players as rational agents allows us to design a protocol that destabilizes coalitions. Thus, we establish a mutual benefit from combining the two fields, while demonstrating the applicability of our framework to real-world market environments. We also give an application of game theory to adversarial interactions where cryptography is not necessary. Specifically, we consider adversarial machine learning, where the adversary is rational and reacts to the presence of a data miner. We give a general extension to classification algorithms that returns greater expected utility for the data miner than existing classification methods.
We apply a Bayesian agent-based framework inspired by QBism to iterations of two quantum games, the CHSH game and the quantum prisoners' dilemma. In each two-player game, players hold beliefs about an amount of shared entanglement and about the actions or beliefs of the other player. Each takes actions which maximize their expected utility and revises their beliefs with the classical Bayes rule between rounds. We simulate iterated play to see if and how players can learn about the presence of shared entanglement and to explore how their performance, their beliefs, and the game's structure interrelate. In the CHSH game, we find that players can learn that entanglement is present and use this to achieve quantum advantage. We find that they can only do so if they also believe the other player will act correctly to exploit the entanglement. In the case of low or zero entanglement in the CHSH game, the players cannot achieve quantum advantage, even in the case where they believe the entanglement is higher than it is. For the prisoners dilemma, we show that assuming 1-fold rational players (rational players who believe the other player is also rational) reduces the quantum extension [Eisert, Wilkens, and Lewenstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3077 (1999)] of the prisoners dilemma to a game with only two strategies, one of which (defect) is dominant for low entanglement, and the other (the quantum strategy Q) is dominant for high entanglement. For intermediate entanglement, neither strategy is dominant. We again show that players can learn entanglement in iterated play. We also show that strong belief in entanglement causes optimal play even in the absence of entanglement -- showing that belief in entanglement is acting as a proxy for the players trusting each other. Our work points to possible future applications in resource detection and quantum algorithm design.
In their paper, "Rational Secure Computation and Ideal Mechanism Design," Izmalkov, Lepinski and Micali show that any one-shot mediated game can be simulated by the players themselves, without the help of a trusted mediator, using physical envelopes and a ballot-box. We show that communication between the players is not essential to the ILM protocol. That is, we provide a protocol for rational secure function evaluation (Rational SFE) where the players just send a set of envelopes to a referee who simply performs a sequence of publicly verifiable actions. That is, the players can "subcontract" all of the computation to an untrusted referee. In addition to providing a communication structure that more closely matches the ideal game, our protocol also enables us to better simulate mediated games in which abort is not a dominated action.