In large-scale games, approximating the opponent's strategy space with a small portfolio of representative strategies is a common and powerful technique. However, the construction of these portfolios often relies on domain-specific knowledge or heuristics with no theoretical guarantees. This paper establishes a formal foundation for portfolio-based strategy approximation. We define the problem of finding an optimal portfolio in two-player zero-sum games and prove that this optimization problem is NP-hard. We demonstrate that several intuitive heuristics-such as using the support of a Nash Equilibrium or building portfolios incrementally - can lead to highly suboptimal solutions. These negative results underscore the problem's difficulty and motivate the need for robust, empirically-validated heuristics. To this end, we introduce an analytical framework to bound portfolio quality and propose a methodology for evaluating heuristic approaches. Our evaluation of several heuristics shows that their success heavily depends on the specific game being solved. Our code is publicly available.
翻译:在大规模博弈中,使用少量代表性策略构成的组合来近似对手的策略空间是一种常见且有效的技术。然而,这些策略组合的构建通常依赖于领域特定知识或启发式方法,缺乏理论保证。本文为基于策略组合的近似方法建立了形式化基础。我们定义了两玩家零和博弈中寻找最优策略组合的问题,并证明了该优化问题是NP难的。我们证明了几种直观的启发式方法——例如使用纳什均衡的支持集或增量构建策略组合——可能导致高度次优的解。这些负面结果凸显了该问题的难度,并强调了需要稳健且经过实证验证的启发式方法。为此,我们引入了一个分析框架来界定策略组合的质量,并提出了一种评估启发式方法的方法论。我们对多种启发式方法的评估表明,其成功与否很大程度上取决于所求解的具体博弈。我们的代码已公开提供。