Dynamic Games of Social Distancing During an Epidemic: Analysis of Asymmetric Solutions

On the adoption of nonpharmaceutical interventions during the pandemic: An evolutionary game model

The adoption of behavioral nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) among the public is essential for tackling the COVID-19 pandemic, yet presents challenges due to the complexity of human behaviors. A large body of literature has utilized classic game theory to investigate the population's decisions regarding the adoption of interventions, where the static solution concept such as the Nash equilibrium is studied. However, individual adoption behavior is not static, instead it is a dynamic process that involves the strategic interactions with other counterparts over time. The study of quantitatively analyzing the dynamics on precautionary behavior during an outbreak is rather scarce. This article fills the research gap by developing an evolutionary game-theoretic framework to model the dynamics of population behavior on the adoption of NPI. We construct the two-group asymmetric game, where behavioral change for each group is characterized by replicator equations. Sensitivity analyses are performed to examine the long-term stability of equilibrium points with respect to perturbation of model parameters. We found that the limiting behavior of intervention adoption in the population consists of only pure strategies in a game setting, indicating that the evolutionary outcome is that everyone either takes up the preventive measure or not. We also applied the framework to examine the mask-wearing behavior, and validated with actual data. Overall, this article provides insights into population dynamics on the adoption of intervention strategy during the outbreak, which can be beneficial for policy makers to better understand the evolutionary trajectory of population behavior.

Learning to Mitigate Epidemic Risks: A Dynamic Population Game Approach

We present a dynamic population game model to capture the behavior of a large population of individuals in presence of an infectious disease or epidemic. Individuals can be in one of five possible infection states at any given time: susceptible, asymptomatic, symptomatic, recovered and unknowingly recovered, and choose whether to opt for vaccination, testing or social activity with a certain degree. We define the evolution of the proportion of agents in each epidemic state, and the notion of best response for agents that maximize long-run discounted expected reward as a function of the current state and policy. We further show the existence of a stationary Nash equilibrium and explore the transient evolution of the disease states and individual behavior under a class of evolutionary learning dynamics. Our results provide compelling insights into how individuals evaluate the trade-off among vaccination, testing and social activity under different parameter regimes, and the impact of different intervention strategies (such as restrictions on social activity) on vaccination and infection prevalence.

Game-Theoretic Frameworks for Epidemic Spreading and Human Decision-Making: A Review

This review presents and reviews various solved and open problems in developing, analyzing, and mitigating epidemic spreading processes under human decision-making. We provide a review of a range of epidemic models and explain the pros and cons of different epidemic models. We exhibit the art of coupling between epidemic models and decision models in the existing literature. More specifically, we provide answers to fundamental questions in human decision-making amid epidemics, including what interventions to take to combat the disease, who are decision-makers, and when and how to take interventions, and how to make interventions. Among many decision models, game-theoretic models have become increasingly crucial in modeling human responses or behavior amid epidemics in the last decade. In this review, we motivate the game-theoretic approach to human decision-making amid epidemics. This review provides an overview of the existing literature by developing a multi-dimensional taxonomy, which categorizes existing literature based on multiple dimensions, including (1) types of games, such as differential games, stochastic games, evolutionary games, and static games; (2) types of interventions, such as social distancing, vaccination, quarantine, and taking antidotes; (3) the types of decision-makers, such as individuals, adversaries, and central authorities at different hierarchical levels. A fine-grained dynamic game framework is proposed to capture the essence of game-theoretic decision-making amid epidemics. We showcase three representative frameworks with unique ways of integrating game-theoretic decision-making into the epidemic models from a vast body of literature. Each of the three frameworks has their unique way of modeling and analyzing and develops results from different angles. In the end, we identify several main open problems and research gaps left to be addressed and filled.

Dynamic Games of Social Distancing During an Epidemic: Analysis of Asymmetric Solutions

Individual behaviors play an essential role in the dynamics of transmission of infectious diseases, including COVID-19. This paper studies a dynamic game model that describes the social distancing behaviors during an epidemic, assuming a continuum of players and individual infection dynamics. The evolution of the players' infection states follows a variant of the well-known SIR dynamics. We assume that the players are not sure about their infection state, and thus, they choose their actions based on their individually perceived probabilities of being susceptible, infected, or removed. The cost of each player depends both on her infection state and on the contact with others. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium and characterize Nash equilibria using nonlinear complementarity problems. We then exploit some monotonicity properties of the optimal policies to obtain a reduced-order characterization for Nash equilibrium and reduce its computation to the solution of a low-dimensional optimization problem. It turns out that, even in the symmetric case, where all the players have the same parameters, players may have very different behaviors. We finally present some numerical studies that illustrate this interesting phenomenon and investigate the effects of several parameters, including the players' vulnerability, the time horizon, and the maximum allowed actions, on the optimal policies and the players' costs.