Abstract
We present a quantum mechanical version of the Colonel Blotto game, where two players, Blotto and Enemy, collocate their soldiers (resources) sequentially in a finite number of territories. We analyse the representative classical cases of this game as well as the trivial case—which on its turn has no interest at all in the point of view of classical game theory—where, surprisingly, a player that could control a single parameter can win the game even if he/she is greatly outnumbered by his/her opponent. Besides the theoretical study we present an experimental realization of classical game by using linear optics circuits as well as a proposal of an experimental investigation of the quantized game. Finally, in order to check our quantization scheme we also present computer simulation results.






Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Press, W.H., Dyson, F.J.: Iterated prisoner’s dilemma contains strategies that dominate any evolutionary opponent. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 109(26), 10409 (2012)
von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O.: The Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, 60th edn. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1944)
Meyer, D.A.: Quantum strategies. Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1052 (1999)
Eisert, J., Wilkens, M., Lewenstein, M.: Quantum games and quantum strategies. Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3077 (1999)
Fra̧ckiewicz, P.: The ultimate solution to the quantum battle of the Sexes game, J. Phys. A 42(36) (2009)
Guo, H., Zhang, J., Koehler, G.J.: A survey of quantum games. Decis. Support Syst. 46(1), 318 (2008)
Challet, D., Zhang, Y.C.: Emergence of cooperation and organization in an evolutionary game. Physica A 246(3), 407 (1997)
de Ponte, M.A., Santos, A.C.: Adiabatic quantum games and phase-transition-like behavior between optimal strategies. Quantum Inf. Process. 17(6), 149 (2018)
Flitney, A.P., Abbott, D.: Quantum version of the Monty Hall problem. Phys. Rev. A 65, 062318 (2002)
Hogg, T., Harsha, P., Chen, K.Y.: Quantum auctions. Int. J. Quantum Inf. 5(05), 751 (2007)
Zeng, Q., Davis, B.R., Abbott, D.: Reverse auction: the lowest unique positive integer game. Fluctuation Noise Lett. 7(04), L439 (2007)
Makowski, M.: Transitivity versus intransitivity in decision making process—an example in quantum game theory. Phys. Lett. A 373, 2125 (2009)
Makowski, M., Piotrowski, E.W.: Transitivity of an entangled choice. J. Phys. A 44, 075301 (2011)
Flitney, A.P., Abbott, D.: Quantum two-and three-person duels. J. Opt. B 6(8), S860 (2004)
Schmidt, A.G.M., Paiva, M.M.: Quantum duel revisited. J. Phys. A 45(12), 125304 (2012)
Balthazar, W.F., Huguenin, J.A.O., Schmidt, A.G.M.: Simultaneous quantum duel. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 84(12), 124002 (2015)
Balthazar, W.F., Passos, M.H.M., Schmidt, A.G.M., Caetano, D.P., Huguenin, J.A.O.: Experimental realization of the quantum duel game using linear optical circuits. J. Phys. B 48(16), 165505 (2015)
Amengual, P., Toral, R.: Truels, or survival of the weakest. Comput. Sci. Eng. 8(5), 88 (2006)
Chowdhury, S.M., Kovenock, D., Sheremeta, R.M., Roman, M.: An experimental investigation of Colonel Blotto games. Econ. Theory 52(3), 833 (2013)
Gross, O., Wagner, R.: A continuous colonel blotto game. Tech. rep, RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE SANTA MONICA CA (1950)
Roberson, B.: The colonel blotto game. Econ. Theory 29(1), 1 (2006)
Roberson, B., Kvasov, D.: The non-constant-sum Colonel Blotto game. Econ. Theory 51(2), 397 (2012)
Hendricks, K., Weiss, A., Wilson, C.: The war of attrition in continuous time with complete information. Int. Econ. Rev. 663–680 (1988)
Hodler, R., Yektaş, H.: All-pay war. Games Econ. Behav. 74(2), 526 (2012)
Myerson, R.B.: Incentives to cultivate favored minorities under alternative electoral systems. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 87(4), 856 (1993)
Szentes, B., Rosenthal, R.W.: Three-object two-bidder simultaneous auctions: chopsticks and tetrahedra. Games Econ. Behav. 44(1), 114 (2003)
Golman, R., Page, S.E.: General Blotto: games of allocative strategic mismatch. Public Choice 138(3–4), 279 (2009)
Lu, J., Zhou, L., Kuang, L.M.: Linear optics implementation for quantum game with two players. Phys. Lett. A 330(1–2), 48 (2004)
Kolenderski, P., Sinha, U., Youning, L., Zhao, T., Volpini, M., Cabello, A., Laflamme, R., Jennewein, T.: Aharonov–Vaidman quantum game with a Young-type photonic qutrit. Phys. Rev. A 86(1), 012321 (2012)
Pinheiro, A.R.C., Souza, C.E.R., Caetano, D.P., Huguenin, J.A.O., Schmidt, A.G.M., Khoury, A.Z.: Vector Vortex implementation of a quantum game. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 30(12), 3210 (2013)
Borges, C.V.S., Hor-Meyll, M., Huguenin, J.A.O., Khoury, A.Z.: Bell-like inequality for the spin-orbit separability of a laser beam. Phys. Rev. A 82(3), 033833 (2010)
Kagalwala, K.H., Di Giuseppe, G., Abouraddy, A.F., Saleh, B.E.: Bell’s measure in classical optical coherence. Nat Photonics 7(1), 72 (2013)
Balthazar, W.F., Souza, C.E.R., Caetano, D.P., Galvão, E.F., Huguenin, J.A.O., Khoury, A.Z.: Tripartite nonseparability in classical optics. Opt. Lett. 41(24), 5797 (2016)
Milione, G., Nguyen, T.A., Leach, J., Nolan, D.A., Alfano, R.R.: Using the nonseparability of vector beams to encode information for optical communication. Opt. Lett. 40(21), 4887 (2015)
Souza, C.E.R., Borges, C.V.S., Khoury, A.Z., Huguenin, J.A.O., Aolita, L., Walborn, S.: Quantum key distribution without a shared reference frame. Phys. Rev. A 77(3), 032345 (2008)
Balthazar, W.F., Caetano, D.P., Souza, C.E.R., Huguenin, J.A.O.: Using polarization to control the phase of spatial modes for application in quantum information. Braz. J. Phys. 44(6), 658 (2014)
Balthazar, W.F., Huguenin, J.A.O.: Conditional operation using three degrees of freedom of a laser beam for application in quantum information. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 33(8), 1649 (2016)
da Silva, B.P., Leal, M.A., Souza, C.E.R., Galvão, E.F., Khoury, A.Z.: Spin-orbit laser mode transfer via a classical analogue of quantum teleportation. J. Phys. B 49(5), 055501 (2016)
Nash, J.: Non-cooperative games. Ann. Math. 54(2), 286 (1951)
Gerrard, A., Burch, J.M.: Introduction to Matrix Methods in Optics. Courier Corporation (1994)
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of Brazilian’s agencies CAPES, FAPERJ, CNPq and INCT—Quantum Information. This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—Brasil (CAPES)—Finance Code 001.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix A: \({{\hat{J}}}\) Operator for \(n=2\)
In this “Appendix” we show the important special case for the quantum Colonel Blotto game for two territories, namely \(n=2\). In order to obtain the entanglement operator \({\hat{J}}\) we need, in the first place, to write the operator \({\hat{A}}\). Choosing the sign of the first element of the second matrix to be positive and the second one to be negative yields,
so, using Eq. (17)
This is the same matrix as \({\hat{R}}(\gamma /2)\otimes {\hat{\varPi }}_1+{\hat{R}}(-\gamma /2)\otimes {\hat{\varPi }}_2\), which corresponds to rotations in different battlefields, namely
which is the same as Eq. (25). For the case maximally entanglement \(\gamma = \pi /2\) then,
Appendix B: Classical Nash equilibrium
In this “Appendix” we will illustrate our quantized version of Colonel Blotto game showing detailed calculations which lead to the results presented in Table 1. In this example Enemy chooses the strategy referring to Nash equilibrium and Blotto chooses an arbitrary strategy. We are considering the specific classical case with three battlefields, both players have six soldiers and they are indivisible. The strategy that achieves the classical Nash equilibrium is the mixed strategy composed by five pure strategies given by Table 1, each one with probability equal to 1 / 5.
Since all classical strategies commute with entanglement operator \({\hat{J}}\), the final state is,
Enemy acts first and he applies his strategy to the initial state,
which yields
when the Enemy chooses the strategy \(s_1\) from Table 1—zero, four and two soldiers dispatched to battlefields one, two and three, respectively—the angles which will rotate the initial state are given by,
substituting the angles in Eq. (30) we obtain,
now Blotto applies an arbitrary strategy,
Now we apply the rotation matrix to the state \(\vert 0\rangle +\vert 1 \rangle \)
Using the above equation and the pay-off definition we have,
In the last equation we calculated Blotto’s pay-off when Enemy chooses the strategy \(s_1\). In order to investigate the Nash equilibrium we need to calculate the pay-off for all others strategies, namely (\(s_2\), \(s_3\), \(s_4\), \(s_5\)), and the procedure is analogue. Therefore, after we calculate all these pay-offs it is necessary to find the expected pay-off which is defined as the sum,
where \(\$_B^i\) is Blotto’s pay-off for each strategy \(s_i\) chosen by his enemy, and all of them have probability 1 / 5. The idea is to test if Blotto can win with an arbitrary strategy against the best classical strategy (which is the strategy related to Nash equilibrium). So we have for strategy \(s_2\),
strategy \(s_3\) gives a pay-off,
the fourth strategy \(s_4\),
and for the last one, \(s_5\), Blotto obtains
Finally the expected pay-off is,
using this final equation we plot the graphic in Fig. 5.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Maioli, A.C., Passos, M.H.M., Balthazar, W.F. et al. Quantization and experimental realization of the Colonel Blotto game. Quantum Inf Process 18, 10 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-018-2113-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-018-2113-5