📝 SummarXiv

Abstract

This paper introduces alignment games, a new class of zero-sum games modeling strategic interventions where effectiveness depends on alignment with an underlying hidden state. Motivated by operational problems in medical diagnostics, economic sanctions, and resource allocation, this framework features two players, a Hider and a Searcher, who choose subsets of a given space. Payoffs are determined by their misalignment (symmetric difference), explicitly modeling the trade-off between commission errors (unnecessary action) and omission errors (missed targets), given by a cost function and a penalty function, respectively. We provide a comprehensive theoretical analysis, deriving closed-form equilibrium solutions that contain interesting mathematical properties based on the game's payoff structure. When cost and penalty functions are unequal, optimal strategies are consistently governed by cost-penalty ratios. On the unit circle, optimal arc lengths are direct functions of this ratio, and in discrete games, optimal choice probabilities are proportional to element-specific ratios. When costs are equal, the solutions exhibit rich structural properties and sharp threshold behaviors. On the unit interval, this manifests as a geometric pattern of minimal covering versus maximal non-overlapping strategies. In discrete games with cardinality constraints, play concentrates on the highest-cost locations, with solutions changing discontinuously as parameters cross critical values. Our framework extends the theory of geometric and search games and is general enough that classical models, such as Matching Pennies, emerge as special cases. These results provide a new theoretical foundation for analyzing the strategic tension between comprehensive coverage and precise targeting under uncertainty.