{"title":"Inefficient Alliance Formation in Coalitional Blotto Games","authors":"Vade Shah, Keith Paarporn, Jason R. Marden","doi":"arxiv-2409.06899","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In adversarial resource allocation settings, forming alliances can enhance\nperformance, but the benefits may diminish if alliance formation becomes\ncostly. In this work, we explore this issue using the framework of the\ncoalitional Blotto game, in which two players compete separately against a\ncommon adversary across valued contests. Each player aims to win contests by\nallocating more of their limited budget than their opponent. Previous work on\nalliance formation in coalitional Blotto games has shown that if one player\ntransfers a portion of their budget to the other, then both players can perform\nbetter; however, it is also known that it is never in either players' interest\nto simply concede a portion of their budget. In this work, we study the setting\nin which transfers are costly, meaning that if one player donates a portion of\ntheir budget, the recipient only receives a fraction of the transferred amount.\nWe show that mutually beneficial costly transfers exist, and we provide\nnecessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of such a costly\ntransfer. Then, we consider the setting in which players can transfer budgets\nand contests at a cost, and we show that this alliance strategy is mutually\nbeneficial in almost all game instances.","PeriodicalId":501316,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Computer Science and Game Theory","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Computer Science and Game Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.06899","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In adversarial resource allocation settings, forming alliances can enhance
performance, but the benefits may diminish if alliance formation becomes
costly. In this work, we explore this issue using the framework of the
coalitional Blotto game, in which two players compete separately against a
common adversary across valued contests. Each player aims to win contests by
allocating more of their limited budget than their opponent. Previous work on
alliance formation in coalitional Blotto games has shown that if one player
transfers a portion of their budget to the other, then both players can perform
better; however, it is also known that it is never in either players' interest
to simply concede a portion of their budget. In this work, we study the setting
in which transfers are costly, meaning that if one player donates a portion of
their budget, the recipient only receives a fraction of the transferred amount.
We show that mutually beneficial costly transfers exist, and we provide
necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of such a costly
transfer. Then, we consider the setting in which players can transfer budgets
and contests at a cost, and we show that this alliance strategy is mutually
beneficial in almost all game instances.