This paper studies the problem of designing contests for settings where a principal seeks to optimize the quality of the best performance obtained, and potential contestants only strategize about whether to participate in the contest, as participation incurs some cost. This type of contest can be mapped to various real-life settings (e.g., an audition, a beauty pageant, technology crowdsourcing). The paper provides a comparative game-theoretic based solution to two variants of the above underlying model: parallel and sequential contest, enabling a characterization of the equilibrium strategies in each. Special emphasis is placed on the case where the contestants are homogeneous which is often the case in real-life whenever the contestants are basically alike and their ranking in the contest is mostly influenced by some probabilistic factors (e.g., luck). Here, several (somehow counter-intuitive) properties of the equilibrium are proved, in particular for the sequential contest, leading to a comprehensive characterization of the principal preference between the two.

This paper considers the problem of cooperation between self-interested agents in acquiring better information regarding the nature of the different options and opportunities available to them. By sharing individual findings with others, the agents can potentially achieve a substantial improvement in overall and individual expected benefits. Unfortunately, it is well known that with self-interested agents equilibrium considerations often dictate solutions that are far from the fully cooperative ones, hence the agents do not manage to fully exploit the potential benefits encapsulated in such cooperation. In this paper we introduce, analyze and demonstrate the benefit of five methods aiming to improve cooperative information gathering. Common to all five that they constrain and limit the information sharing process. Nevertheless, the decrease in benefit due to the limited sharing is outweighed by the resulting substantial improvement in the equilibrium individual information gathering strategies. The equilibrium analysis given in the paper, which, in itself is an important contribution to the study of cooperation between self-interested agents, enables demonstrating that for a wide range of settings an improved individual expected benefit is achieved for all agents when applying each of the five methods.

This paper studies distributed cooperative multi-agent exploration methods in settings where the exploration is costly and the overall performance measure is determined by the minimum performance achieved by any of the individual agents. Such an exploration setting is applicable to various multi-agent systems, e.g., in Dynamic Spectrum Access exploration. The goal in such problems is to optimize the process as a whole, considering the tradeoffs between the quality of the solution obtained and the cost associated with the exploration and coordination between the agents. Through the analysis of the two extreme cases where coordination is completely free and when entirely disabled, we manage to extract the solution for the general case where coordination is taken to be costly, modeled as a fee that needs to be paid for each additional coordinated agent. The strategy structure for the general case is shown to be threshold-based, and the thresholds which are analytically derived in this paper can be calculated offline, resulting in a very low online computational load.

Motivated by applications in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks, we focus on a system in which a few agents are engaged in a costly individual exploration process where each agent's benefit is determined according to the minimum obtained value. Such an