Concavity and its refinements underpin tractability in multiplayer games, where players independently choose actions to maximize their own payoffs which depend on other players’ actions. In *concave* games, where players' strategy sets are compact and convex, and their payoffs are concave in their own actions, strong guarantees follow: Nash equilibria always exist and decentralized algorithms converge to equilibria. If the game is furthermore *monotone*, an even stronger guarantee holds: Nash equilibria are unique under strictness assumptions. Unfortunately, we show that *certifying* concavity or monotonicity is NP-hard, already for games where utilities are multivariate polynomials and compact, convex basic semialgebraic strategy sets—an expressive class that captures extensive-form games with imperfect recall. On the positive side, we develop two hierarchies of sum-of-squares programs that certify concavity and monotonicity of a given game, and each level of the hierarchies can be solved in polynomial time. We show that almost all concave/monotone games are certified at some finite level of the hierarchies. Subsequently, we introduce the classes of SOS-concave/monotone games, which globally approximate concave/monotone games, and show that for any given game we can compute the closest SOS-concave/monotone game in polynomial time. Finally, we apply our techniques to canonical examples of extensive-form games with imperfect recall.

We consider a learning system based on the conventional multiplicative weight (MW) rule that combines experts' advice to predict a sequence of true outcomes. It is assumed that one of the experts is malicious and aims to impose the maximum loss on the system. The system's loss is naturally defined to be the aggregate absolute difference between the sequence of predicted outcomes and the true outcomes. We consider this problem under both offline and online settings. In the offline setting where the malicious expert must choose its entire sequence of decisions a priori, we show somewhat surprisingly that a simple greedy policy of always reporting false prediction is asymptotically optimal with an approximation ratio of 1+O√(ln N)/N, where N is the total number of prediction stages. In particular, we describe a policy that closely resembles the structure of the optimal offline policy. For the online setting where the malicious expert can adaptively make its decisions, we show that the optimal online policy can be efficiently computed by solving a dynamic program in O(N3). We also discuss a generalization of our model to multi-expert settings. Our results provide a new direction for vulnerability assessment of commonly-used learning algorithms to internal adversarial attacks.