The core of games on ordered structures and graphs

In cooperative games, the core is the most popular solution concept, and its properties are well known. In the classical setting of cooperative games, it is generally assumed that all coalitions can form, i.e., they are all feasible. In many situations, this assumption is too strong and one has to deal with some unfeasible coalitions. Defining a game on a subcollection of the power set of the set of players has many implications on the mathematical structure of the core, depending on the precise structure of the subcollection of feasible coalitions. Many authors have contributed to this topic, and we give a unified view of these different results.     

The core of games on ordered structures and graphs

In cooperative games, the core is the most popular solution concept, and its properties are well known. In the classical setting of cooperative games, it is generally assumed that all coalitions can form, i.e., they are all feasible. In many situations, this assumption is too strong and one has to deal with some unfeasible coalitions. Defining a game on a subcollection of the power set of the set of players has many implications on the mathematical structure of the core, depending on the precise structure of the subcollection of feasible coalitions. Many authors have contributed to this topic, and we give a unified view of these different results.     

Interaction indices for games on combinatorial structures with forbidden coalitions

The notion of interaction among a set of players has been defined on the Boolean lattice and Cartesian products of lattices. The aim of this paper is to extend this concept to combinatorial structures with forbidden coalitions. The set of feasible coalitions is supposed to fulfil some general conditions. This general representation encompasses convex geometries, antimatroids, augmenting systems and distributive lattices. Two axiomatic characterizations are obtained. They both assume that the Shapley value is already defined on the combinatorial structures. The first one is restricted to pairs of players and is based on a generalization of a recursivity axiom that uniquely specifies the interaction index from the Shapley value when all coalitions are permitted. This unique correspondence cannot be maintained when some coalitions are forbidden. From this, a weak recursivity axiom is defined. We show that this axiom together with linearity and dummy player are sufficient to specify the interaction index. The second axiomatic characterization is obtained from the linearity, dummy player and partnership axioms. An interpretation of the interaction index in the context of surplus sharing is also proposed. Finally, our interaction index is instantiated to the case of games under precedence constraints.     

Theτ-value for games on matroids

In the classical model of games with transferable utility one assumes that each subgroup of players can form and cooperate to obtain its value. However, we can think that in some situations this assumption is not realistic, that is, not all coalitions are feasible. This suggests that it is necessary to raise the whole question of generalizing the concept of transferable utility game, and therefore to introduce new solution concepts. In this paper we define games on matroids and extend theτ-value as a compromise value for these games. This work has been partially supported by the Spanish Ministery of Science and Technology under grant SEC2000-1243.     

The intermediate set and limiting superdifferential for coalitional games: between the core and the Weber set

We introduce the intermediate set as an interpolating solution concept between the core and the Weber set of a coalitional game. The new solution is defined as the limiting superdifferential of the Lovász extension and thus it completes the hierarchy of variational objects used to represent the core (Fréchet superdifferential) and the Weber set (Clarke superdifferential). It is shown that the intermediate set is a non-convex solution containing the Pareto optimal payoff vectors that depend on some chain of coalitions and marginal coalitional contributions with respect to the chain. A detailed comparison between the intermediate set and other set-valued solutions is provided. We compute the exact form of intermediate set for all games and provide its simplified characterization for the simple games and the glove game.     

On the restricted cores and the bounded core of games on distributive lattices

A game with precedence constraints is a TU game with restricted cooperation, where the set of feasible coalitions is a distributive lattice, hence generated by a partial order on the set of players. Its core may be unbounded, and the bounded core, which is the union of all bounded faces of the core, proves to be a useful solution concept in the framework of games with precedence constraints. Replacing the inequalities that define the core by equations for a collection of coalitions results in a face of the core. A collection of coalitions is called normal if its resulting face is bounded. The bounded core is the union of all faces corresponding to minimal normal collections. We show that two faces corresponding to distinct normal collections may be distinct. Moreover, we prove that for superadditive games and convex games only intersecting and nested minimal collection, respectively, are necessary. Finally, it is shown that the faces corresponding to pairwise distinct nested normal collections may be pairwise distinct, and we provide a means to generate all such collections.     

Ensuring the boundedness of the core of games with restricted cooperation

The core of a cooperative game on a set of players N is one of the most popular concepts of solution. When cooperation is restricted (feasible coalitions form a subcollection \(\mathcal{F}\) of 2 ^N ), the core may become unbounded, which makes its usage questionable in practice. Our proposal is to make the core bounded by turning some of the inequalities defining the core into equalities (additional efficiency constraints). We address the following mathematical problem: can we find a minimal set of inequalities in the core such that, if turned into equalities, the core becomes bounded? The new core obtained is called the restricted core. We completely solve the question when \(\mathcal{F}\) is a distributive lattice, introducing also the notion of restricted Weber set. We show that the case of regular set systems amounts more or less to the case of distributive lattices. We also study the case of weakly union-closed systems and give some results for the general case.     

Dynamic resource allocation in fuzzy coalitions: a game theoretic model

We introduce an efficient and dynamic resource allocation mechanism within the framework of a cooperative game with fuzzy coalitions (cooperative fuzzy game). A fuzzy coalition in a resource allocation problem can be so defined that membership grades of the players in it are proportional to the fractions of their total resources. We call any distribution of the resources possessed by the players, among a prescribed number of coalitions, a fuzzy coalition structure and every membership grade (equivalently fraction of the total resources), a resource investment. It is shown that this resource investment is influenced by the satisfaction of the players in regard to better performance under a cooperative setup. Our model is based on the real life situations, where possibly one or more players compromise on their resource investments in order to help forming coalitions.     

A new approach to the core and Weber set of multichoice games

Multichoice games have been introduced by Hsiao and Raghavan as a generalization of classical cooperative games. An important notion in cooperative game theory is the core of the game, as it contains the rational imputations for players. We propose two definitions for the core of a multichoice game, the first one is called the precore and is a direct generalization of the classical definition. We show that the precore coincides with the definition proposed by Faigle, and that the set of imputations may be unbounded, which makes its application questionable. A second definition is proposed, imposing normalization at each level, causing the core to be a convex compact set. We study its properties, introducing balancedness and marginal worth vectors, and defining the Weber set and the pre-Weber set. We show that the classical properties of inclusion of the (pre)core into the (pre)-Weber set as well as their coincidence in the convex case remain valid. A last section makes a comparison with the core defined by Van den Nouweland et al. A preliminary and short version of this paper has been presented at 4th Logic, Game Theory and Social Choice meeting, Caen, France, June 2005 (Xie and Grabisch 2005).     

Global games

Global games are real-valued functions defined on partitions (rather than subsets) of the set of players. They capture “public good” aspects of cooperation, i.e., situations where the payoff is naturally defined for all players (“the globe”) together, as is the case with issues of environmental clean-up, medical research, and so forth. We analyze the more general concept of lattice functions and apply it to partition functions, set functions and the interrelation between the two. We then use this analysis to define and characterize the Shapley value and the core of global games.     

On bargaining position descriptions in non-transferable utility games

We present a generalization to the Harsanyi solution for non-transferable utility (NTU) games based on non-symmetry among the players. Our notion of non-symmetry is presented by a configuration of weights which correspond to players' relative bargaining power in various coalitions. We show not only that our solution (i.e., the bargaining position solution) generalizes the Harsanyi solution, (and thus also the Shapley value), but also that almost all the non-symmetric generalizations of the Shapley value for transferable utility games known in the literature are in fact bargaining position solutions. We also show that the non-symmetric Nash solution for the bargaining problem is also a special case of our general solution. We use our general representation of non-symmetry to make a detailed comparison of all the recent extensions of the Shapley value using both a direct and an axiomatic approach.     

Optimal coalition formation and surplus distribution: Two sides of one coin

A fuzzy coalitional game represents a situation in which players can vary the intensity at which they participate in the coalitions accessible to them, as opposed to the treatment as a binary choice in the non-fuzzy (crisp) game. Building on the property - not made use of so far in the literature of fuzzy games - that a fuzzy game can be represented as a convex program, this paper shows that the optimum of such a program determines the optimal coalitions as well as the optimal rewards for the players, two sides of one coin. Furthermore, this program is seen to provide a unifying framework for representing the core, the least core, and the (fuzzy) nucleolus, among others. Next, we derive conditions for uniqueness of core rewards and to deal with non-uniqueness we introduce a family of parametric perturbations of the convex program that encompasses a large number of well-known concepts for selection from the core, including the Dutta-Ray solution (Dutta and Ray, 1989), the equal sacrifice solution (Yu, 1973), the equal division solution (Selten, 1972) and the tau-value (Tijs, 1981). We also generalize the concept of the Grand Coalition of contracting players by allowing for multiple technologies, and we specify the conditions for this allocation to be unique and Egalitarian. Finally, we show that our formulation offers a natural extension to existing models of production economies with threats and division rules for common surplus.     

Stability property of matchings is a natural solution concept in coalitional market games

Stability of matchings was proved to be a new cooperative equilibrium concept in Sotomayor (Dynamics and equilibrium: essays in honor to D. Gale, 1992). That paper introduces the innovation of treating as multi-dimensional the payoff of a player with a quota greater than one. This is done for the many-to-many matching model with additively separable utilities, for which the stability concept is defined. It is then proved, via linear programming, that the set of stable outcomes is nonempty and it may be strictly bigger than the set of dual solutions and strictly smaller than the core. The present paper defines a general concept of stability and shows that this concept is a natural solution concept, stronger than the core concept, for a much more general coalitional game than a matching game. Instead of mutual agreements inside partnerships, the players are allowed to make collective agreements inside coalitions of any size and to distribute his labor among them. A collective agreement determines the level of labor at which the coalition operates and the division, among its members, of the income generated by the coalition. An allocation specifies a set of collective agreements for each player.     

Cooperative games with coalition structures

Many game-theoretic solution notions have been defined or can be defined not only with reference to the all-player coalition, but also with reference to an arbitrary coalition structure. In this paper, theorems are established that connect a given solution notion, defined for a coalition structure ? with the same solution notion applied to appropriately defined games on each of the coalitions in ?. This is done for the kernel, nucleolus, bargaining set, value, core, and thevon Neumann-Morgenstern solution. It turns out that there is a single function that plays the central role in five out of the six solution notions in question, though each of these five notions is entirely different. This is an unusual instance of a game theoretic phenomenon that does not depend on a particular solution notion but holds across a wide class of such notions.     

Contractually stable networks

We consider situations where players are part of a network and belong to coalitions in a given coalition structure. We propose the concept of contractual stability to predict the networks that are going to emerge at equilibrium when the consent of coalition partners is needed for adding or deleting links. Two different decision rules for consent are analyzed: simple majority and unanimity. We characterize the coalition structures that make the strongly efficient network contractually stable under the unanimity decision rule and the coalition structures that sustain some critical network as contractually stable under the simple majority decision rule and under any decision rule requiring the consent of any proportion of coalition partners. Requiring the consent of coalition members may help to reconcile stability and efficiency in some classical models of network formation.     

Characterization of the core in games with restricted cooperation

Games with restricted cooperation describe situations in which the players are not completely free in forming coalitions. The restrictions in coalition formation can be attributed to economic, hierarchical, political or ethical reasons. In order to manage these situations, the model includes a collection of coalitions which determines the feasible agreements among the agents. The purpose of this paper is to extend the characterization of the core of a cooperative game, made by Peleg [International Journal of Game Theory 15 (1986) 187–200; Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, vol. I. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., pp. 397–412] to the context of games with restricted cooperation. In order to make the approach as general as possible, we will consider classes of games with restricted cooperation in which the collection of feasible coalitions has a determined structure, and we will impose conditions on that structure to generalize the Peleg’s axiomatization.     

“Procedural” values for cooperative games

This paper introduces a new notion of a “procedural” value for cooperative TU games. A procedural value is determined by an underlying procedure of sharing marginal contributions to coalitions formed by players joining in random order. We consider procedures under which players can only share their marginal contributions with their predecessors in the ordering, and study the set of all resulting values. The most prominent procedural value is, of course, the Shapley value obtaining under the simplest procedure of every player just retaining his entire marginal contribution. But different sharing rules lead to other interesting values, including the “egalitarian solution” and the Nowak and Radzik “solidarity value”. All procedural values are efficient, symmetric and linear. Moreover, it is shown that these properties together with two very natural monotonicity postulates characterize the class of procedural values. Some possible modifications and generalizations are also discussed. In particular, it is shown that dropping one of monotonicity axioms is equivalent to allowing for sharing marginal contributions with both predecessors and successors in the ordering.     

Credible coalitions and the core

A problem with the concept of the core is that it does not explicitly capture the credibility of blocking coalitions. This notion is defined, and the concept of a modified core introduced, consisting of allocations not blocked by any credible coalition. The core and modified core are then shown to be identical. The concept of credibility is thus implicit in the definition of the core.I am grateful to Kenneth Arrow, Doug Bernheim, Peter Hammond and Yair Tauman for helpful comments. I was affiliated to the Department of Economics, Stanford University, when this note was originally written in 1983.