Skip to content

Return full profiles from enumpoly_solve#791

Draft
tturocy wants to merge 15 commits intomasterfrom
issue_660
Draft

Return full profiles from enumpoly_solve#791
tturocy wants to merge 15 commits intomasterfrom
issue_660

Conversation

@tturocy
Copy link
Member

@tturocy tturocy commented Mar 6, 2026

This proposes a change to enumpoly_solve such that it now returns only full profiles.

By convention, it returns profiles which specify only pure actions on information sets which are reached with zero probability.

For information sets which are not support-reachable, this returns all equilibria which are in pure strategies on those information sets.
…it is enough to consider pure action profiles.
…` is advertised as a Nash-finding rather than agent-Nash-finding method.
…ions at "one-step" deviations from the candidate profiles, and the centroid for all information sets reachable only by two or more deviations.
@rahulsavani
Copy link
Member

@tturocy, an update:

  • the two tests you marked as xfailing in Restrict search space for enumpoly to be strictly interior. #764 have been updated and I don't see any issue with those;
  • the earlier two xfailing examples based on the trust game have naturally been fixed as expected;
  • I simply commented out the only other two xfailing tests, which are both Stephen's large (huge) payoff game, and don't really make sense in the double setting;
  • I added 3 new test cases for the "two off the path" aspect of things (see test_enumpoly_behavior_{10,11,12}) -- with these I am happy that what is being done is reasonable enough, but I am not sure we discussed this all explicitly, so see if you are happy where the centroid is being used (for test_enumpoly_behavior_10) I marked the relevant supports from the CLI in the comments for your convenience.

@tturocy
Copy link
Member Author

tturocy commented Mar 11, 2026

Seems like this is looking pretty good. Things to check before we merge and draw a line under this:

  • Is this now consistent with what lp and lcp do - centroid for two-step deviations? Acknowledged that there is going to be a difference in one-step deviations, because lp and lcp might in principle find the "mixed" end of a continuum of equilibria

  • Are we now documenting this well, and specifically that we follow this centroid convention consistently across the three sequence-form methods?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Bug]: enumpoly returns a profile with undefined probabilities that may not be a Nash eq

2 participants