Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2602.12253

Is Online Linear Optimization Sufficient for Strategic Robustness?

Abstract

We consider bidding in repeated Bayesian first-price auctions. Bidding algorithms that achieve optimal regret have been extensively studied, but their strategic robustness to the seller's manipulation remains relatively underexplored. Bidding algorithms based on no-swap-regret algorithms achieve both desirable properties, but are suboptimal in terms of statistical and computational efficiency. In contrast, online gradient ascent is the only algorithm that achieves $O(\sqrt{TK})$ regret and strategic robustness [KSS24], where $T$ denotes the number of auctions and $K$ the number of bids. In this paper, we explore whether simple online linear optimization (OLO) algorithms suffice for bidding algorithms with both desirable properties. Our main result shows that sublinear linearized regret is sufficient for strategic robustness. Specifically, we construct simple black-box reductions that convert any OLO algorithm into a strategically robust no-regret bidding algorithm, in both known and unknown value distribution settings. For the known value distribution case, our reduction yields a bidding algorithm that achieves $O(\sqrt{T \log K})$ regret and strategic robustness (with exponential improvement on the $K$-dependence compared to [KSS24]). For the unknown value distribution case, our reduction gives a bidding algorithm with high-probability $O(\sqrt{T (\log K+\log(T/δ)})$ regret and strategic robustness, while removing the bounded density assumption made in [KSS24].

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Yang Cai, Haipeng Luo, Chen-Yu Wei, Weiqiang Zheng. 2026-02-12. Is Online Linear Optimization Sufficient for Strategic Robustness?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.12253

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Learning in Structured Stackelberg Games

We initiate the study of structured Stackelberg games, a novel form of strategic interaction between a leader and a follower where contextual information can be predictive of the follower's (unknown) type. Motivated by applications such as security games and AI safety, we show how this additional structure can help the leader learn a utility-maximizing policy in both the online and distributional settings. In the online setting, we first prove that standard learning-theoretic measures of complexity do not characterize the difficulty of the leader's learning task. Notably, we find that there exists a learning-theoretic measure of complexity, analogous to the Littlestone dimension in online classification, that tightly characterizes the leader's instance-optimal regret. We term this the Stackelberg-Littlestone dimension, and leverage it to provide a provably optimal online learning algorithm. In the distributional setting, we provide analogous results by showing that two new dimensions control the sample complexity upper- and lower-bound.

cs.GT

Equilibrium and Infeasibility: A new solution concept for games

Addressing infeasibility in non-cooperative games has become an important topic, as many problems across different applications face this issue. In this paper, we propose a new solution concept for generalized games with possibly infeasible individual constraints. A solution is defined as the limit of a sequence of generalized Nash equilibria induced by games with penalty terms relaxing the individual constraints. Existence is established for a broad range of games and we provide conditions allowing to characterize a $ψ$-penalized solution as a strategy profile maximizing every player's utility over all her penalty minimizing strategies. A variation of Divide-the-Dollar serves as an illustrative example. We further establish the compatibility with the GNE and the solution to the Nash bargaining.

cs.GT

Subgame-Perfect Nash Equilibria of Plurality Voting with Abstention: a PSPACE-Completeness Result for Restricted Ballots

We consider sequential Plurality elections in which each voter may abstain or vote for a single candidate. Each voter assigns utilities to all candidates; for each voter, this induces a (weak) order over the candidates. Ties are resolved uniformly at random, and voting has a small positive cost, so that a voter prefers to abstain when their vote cannot change the election outcome. We consider a variant of this model where, for each voter, we additionally specify a prefix of her ranking, so that she is only allowed to vote for a candidate from that prefix (or abstain). We prove that for this variant of the model, deciding whether a designated candidate is among the election winners in a subgame-perfect equilibrium of the associated extensive-form game is PSPACE-complete. This partially resolves an open problem from the work of Desmedt and Elkind [2010].

cs.GT