On the Trail of Lost Pennies: player-funded tug-of-war on the integers
Abstract
We study random-turn resource-allocation games. In the Trail of Lost Pennies, a counter moves on Z. At each turn, Maxine stakes a ∈ [0,∞) and Mina b ∈ [0,∞). The counter X then moves adjacently, to the right with probability aa+b. If Xi -∞ in this infinte-turn game, Mina receives one unit, and Maxine zero; if Xi ∞, then these receipts are zero and x. Thus the net receipt to a given player is -A+B, where A is the sum of her stakes, and B is her terminal receipt. The game was inspired by unbiased tug-of-war in~[PSSW] from 2009 but in fact closely resembles the original version of tug-of-war, introduced [HarrisVickers87] in the economics literature in 1987. We show that the game has surprising features. For a natural class of strategies, Nash equilibria exist precisely when x lies in [λ,λ-1], for a certain λ ∈ (0,1). We indicate that λ is remarkably close to one, proving that λ ≤ 0.999904 and presenting clear numerical evidence that λ ≥ 1 - 10-4. For each x ∈ [λ,λ-1], we find countably many Nash equilibria. Each is roughly characterized by an integral battlefield index: when the counter is nearby, both players stake intensely, with rapid but asymmetric decay in stakes as it moves away. Our results advance premises [HarrisVickers87,Konrad12] for fund management and the incentive-outcome relation that plausibly hold for many player-funded stake-governed games. Alongside a companion treatment [HP22] of games with allocated budgets, we thus offer a detailed mathematical treatment of an illustrative class of tug-of-war games. We also review the separate developments of tug-of-war in economics and mathematics in the hope that mathematicians direct further attention to tug-of-war in its original resource-allocation guise.
Turn this paper into a lesson
ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.