Negotiation,preferences over agreements,and the core

We analyze conditions under which negotiated agreements are efficient from the point of view of every possible coalition of negotiators. The negotiators have lexicographic preferences over agreements they reach. Their utility is the first criterion. The coalition reaching an agreement is the second criterion. In the analyzed non-cooperative discrete time bargaining game Γ the players bargain about the choice from the sets of utility vectors feasible for coalitions in a given NTU game (N, V). If Γ has a Markov perfect equilibrium, then the set of equilibrium utility vectors in Markov perfect equilibria in it equals the core of (N, V). I thank an anonymous referee, an anonymous Associate Editor, and the Editor for their comments that helped me to improve the paper. The research reported in this paper was supported by the Grant VEGA 1/1223/04 of the Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic.     

On the existence and efficiency of the von Neumann-Morgenstern stable set in a n-player prisoners' dilemma

We show that there exist von Neumann-Morgenstern (vN-M) stable sets in a n-player version of the prisoners' dilemma game with preplay negotiations in which every player can deviate unilaterally from the currently proposed combination of actions but can not do so jointly with other players, and that every vN-M stable set includes at least one Pareto-efficient outcome. The negotiation among the players is formulated as the “individual contingent threats situation” within the framework of the theory of social situations due to Greenberg (1990). The method of proving the existence also provides us with a step-by-step method of constructing the vN-M stable set. Final version June 2001     

Noncooperative farsighted stable set in an <Emphasis Type="Italic">n</Emphasis>-player prisoners’ dilemma

We examine an n-player prisoners’ dilemma game in which only individual deviations are allowed, while coalitional deviations (even non-binding ones) are not, and every player is assumed to be sufficiently farsighted to understand not only the direct outcome of his own deviation but also the ultimate outcome resulting from a chain of subsequent deviations by other players. We show that there exists a unique, noncooperative farsighted stable set (NFSS) and that it supports at least one (partially and/or fully) cooperative outcome, which is individually rational and Pareto-efficient. We provide a sufficient condition for full cooperation. Further, we discuss the relationship between NFSS and other “stable set” concepts such as the (myopic) von Neumann–Morgenstern stable set, Harsanyi (1974)’s strictly stable set, Chwe (1994)’s largest consistent set, and the cooperative farsighted stable set examined by Suzuki and Muto (2005). The author is very grateful to Professor Eiichi Miyagawa, the editor and the associate editor of this journal for their insightful comments and suggestions. He also acknowledges the financial support of Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C), No. 18530175].     

Single-payoff farsighted stable sets in strategic games with dominant punishment strategies

We investigate farsighted stable sets in a class of strategic games with dominant punishment strategies. In this class of games, each player has a strategy that uniformly minimizes the other players’ payoffs for any given strategies chosen by these other players. We particularly investigate a special class of farsighted stable sets, each of which consists of strategy profiles yielding a single payoff vector. We call such a farsighted stable set as a single-payoff farsighted stable set. We propose a concept called an inclusive set that completely characterizes single-payoff farsighted stable sets in strategic games with dominant punishment strategies. We also show that the set of payoff vectors yielded by single-payoff farsighted stable sets is closely related to the strict \(\alpha \)-core in a strategic game. Furthermore, we apply the results to strategic games where each player has two strategies and strategic games associated with some market models.     

Non-binding agreements and fairness in commons dilemma games

Usually, common pool games are analyzed without taking into account the cooperative features of the game, even when communication and non-binding agreements are involved. Whereas equilibria are inefficient, negotiations may induce some cooperation and may enhance efficiency. In the paper, we propose to use tools of cooperative game theory to advance the understanding of results in dilemma situations that allow for communication. By doing so, we present a short review of earlier experimental evidence given by Hackett, Schlager, and Walker 1994 (HSW) for the conditional stability of non-binding agreements established in face-to-face multilateral negotiations. For an experimental test, we reanalyze the HSW data set in a game-theoretical analysis of cooperative versions of social dilemma games. The results of cooperative game theory that are most important for the application are explained and interpreted with respect to their meaning for negotiation behavior. Then, theorems are discussed that cooperative social dilemma games are clear (alpha- and beta-values coincide) and that they are convex (it follows that the core is “large”): The main focus is on how arguments of power and fairness can be based on the structure of the game. A second item is how fairness and stability properties of a negotiated (non-binding) agreement can be judged. The use of cheap talk in evaluating experiments reveals that besides the relation of non-cooperative and cooperative solutions, say of equilibria and core, the relation of alpha-, beta- and gamma-values are of importance for the availability of attractive solutions and the stability of the such agreements. In the special case of the HSW scenario, the game shows properties favorable for stable and efficient solutions. Nevertheless, the realized agreements are less efficient than expected. The realized (and stable) agreements can be located between the equilibrium, the egalitarian solution and some fairness solutions. In order to represent the extent to which the subjects obey efficiency and fairness, we present and discuss patterns of the corresponding excess vectors.     

Approachability of Convex Sets in Games with Partial Monitoring

We provide a necessary and sufficient condition under which a convex set is approachable in a game with partial monitoring, i.e. where players do not observe their opponents’ moves but receive random signals. This condition is an extension of Blackwell’s Criterion in the full monitoring framework, where players observe at least their payoffs. When our condition is fulfilled, we construct explicitly an approachability strategy, derived from a strategy satisfying some internal consistency property in an auxiliary game.     

Computational complexity of stable partitions with B-preferences

Consider a special stable partition problem in which the player's preferences over sets to which she could belong are identical with her preferences over the most attractive member of a set and in case of indifference the set of smaller cardinality is preferred. If the preferences of all players over other (individual) players are strict, a strongly stable and a stable partition always exists. However, if ties are present, we show that both the existence problems are NP-complete. These results are very similar to what is known for the stable roommates problem. Received: July 2000/Revised: October 2002 RID="*" ID="*"  This work was supported by the Slovak Agency for Science, contract #1/7465/20 “Combinatorial Structures and Complexity of Algorithms”.     

The stable set of the social conflict game with commitments: existence,uniqueness, and efficiency

We investigate the stable sets of social conflict games by employing the framework of the (abstract) system by Greenberg (Theory of social situations: an alternative game theoretic approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990). The social conflict game is a class of strategic games that includes the prisoners’ dilemma and the chicken game. We first show that the stable set generally fails to exist in a system that is directly derived from the social conflict game. In this system, the stable set exists if and only if the strong equilibrium exists in the underlying game. If the stable set exists, it coincides with the set of the strong equilibria that is equivalent to the core for the system. Then, we turn to a modified system where the players are allowed to make commitments. In the system with commitments, the stable set always exists, and it consists of efficient outcomes with a certain property. We also discuss the relationship between the core and the stable set for the system with commitments.     

Farsighted coalitional stability in TU-games

We study farsighted coalitional stability in the context of TU-games. We show that every TU-game has a nonempty largest consistent set and that each TU-game has a von Neumann–Morgenstern farsighted stable set. We characterize the collection of von Neumann–Morgenstern farsighted stable sets. We also show that the farsighted core is either empty or equal to the set of imputations of the game. In the last section, we explore the stability of the Shapley value. The Shapley value of a superadditive game is a stable imputation: it is a core imputation or it constitutes a von Neumann–Morgenstern farsighted stable set. A necessary and sufficient condition for a superadditive game to have the Shapley value in the largest consistent set is given.     

Pure strategy Nash equilibria in non-zero sum colonel Blotto games

We analyze a Colonel Blotto game in which opposing parties have differing relative intensities. In other words, the game is non-zero sum because colonels have asymmetric and heterogeneous battlefield valuations. We characterize the colonels’ payoffs that sustain a pure strategy equilibrium and present an algorithm that reaches the equilibrium actions (when they exist). Finally we show that the set of games with a pure strategy equilibria is non-empty.     

A Strong Anti-Folk Theorem

We study the properties of finitely complex, symmetric, globally stable, and semi-perfect equilibria. We show that: (1) If a strategy satisfies these properties then players play a Nash equilibrium of the stage game in every period; (2) The set of finitely complex, symmetric, globally stable, semi-perfect equilibrium payoffs in the repeated game equals the set of Nash equilibria payoffs in the stage game; and (3) A strategy vector satisfies these properties in a Pareto optimal way if and only if players play some Pareto optimal Nash equilibrium of the stage game in every stage. Our second main result is a strong anti-Folk Theorem, since, in contrast to what is described by the Folk Theorem, the set of equilibrium payoffs does not expand when the game is repeated.This paper is a revised version of Chapter 3 of my Ph.D. thesis, which has circulated under the title “An Interpretation of Nash Equilibrium Based on the Notion of Social Institutions”.     

Analysis and design of selection committees: a game theoretic secretary problem

Firms often delegate important decisions to committees which are set up specifically for that purpose; for example selection committees. We analyze the equilibrium behavior of a game in which committee members (the players) interview candidates sequentially, either hiring or going on to the next one. The players have differing evaluations of candidates (e.g. one cares about typing skills; the other about IT skills), which become their utilities if the candidate is hired. We then consider the optimal design (rules of the game) of such a committee, from the point of view of the firm. That is, which rules hire candidates which maximize the firm’s utility. Our committee game has a first round in which the members sequentially, by order of player number, say ‘yea’ or ‘nea’ to the candidate. If there are sufficient ‘yeas’ then she is tentatively hired; otherwise she is rejected. In the former case, members who said nea can veto the candidate in the second round. Thus the candidate is either hired, rejected, or vetoed. In the last case, the member casting a veto has one less to use on later candidates. We analyze equilibria where a player may say ‘yea’ to a candidate he would prefer not to hire, in order to force the other player to use up a valuable veto. We show that for the uniform candidate distribution there is a unique equilibrium and better candidates for the firm are hired when there are more vetoes. However we exhibit a candidate distribution where increasing the numbers of vetoes results in hiring worse candidates.     

Revisiting Generalized Nash Games and Variational Inequalities

Generalized Nash games with shared constraints represent an extension of Nash games in which strategy sets are coupled across players through a shared or common constraint. The equilibrium conditions of such a game can be compactly stated as a quasi-variational inequality (QVI), an extension of the variational inequality (VI). In (Eur. J. Oper. Res. 54(1):81–94, 1991), Harker proved that for any QVI, under certain conditions, a solution to an appropriately defined VI solves the QVI. This is a particularly important result, given that VIs are generally far more tractable than QVIs. However Facchinei et al. (Oper. Res. Lett. 35(2):159–164, 2007) suggested that the hypotheses of this result are difficult to satisfy in practice for QVIs arising from generalized Nash games with shared constraints. We investigate the applicability of Harker’s result for these games with the aim of formally establishing its reach. Specifically, we show that if Harker’s result is applied in a natural manner, its hypotheses are impossible to satisfy in most settings, thereby supporting the observations of Facchinei et al. But we also show that an indirect application of the result extends the realm of applicability of Harker’s result to all shared-constraint games. In particular, this avenue allows us to recover as a special case of Harker’s result, a result provided by Facchinei et al. (Oper. Res. Lett. 35(2):159–164, 2007), in which it is shown that a suitably defined VI provides a solution to the QVI of a shared-constraint game.     

C-complete sets for compromise stable games

The core cover of a TU-game is a superset of the core and equals the convex hull of its larginal vectors. A larginal vector corresponds to an ordering of the players and describes the efficient payoff vector giving the first players in the ordering their utopia demand as long as it is still possible to assign the remaining players at least their minimum right. A game is called compromise stable if the core is equal to the core cover, i.e. the core is the convex hull of the larginal vectors. This paper analyzes the structure of orderings corresponding to larginal vectors of the core cover and conditions ensuring equality between core cover and core. We introduce compromise complete (or c-complete) sets that satisfy the condition that if every larginal vector corresponding to an ordering of the set is a core element, then the game is compromise stable. We use combinatorial arguments to give a complete characterization of these sets. More specifically, we find c-complete sets of minimum cardinality and a closed formula for the minimum number of orderings in c-complete sets. Furthermore, we discuss the number of different larginal vectors corresponding to a c-complete set of orderings.     

The Myerson Value and Superfluous Supports in Union Stable Systems

In this paper, the set of feasible coalitions in a cooperative game is given by a union stable system. Well-known examples of such systems are communication situations and permission structures. Two games associated with a game on a union stable system are the restricted game (on the set of players in the game) and the conference game (on the set of supports of the system). We define two types of superfluous support property through these two games and provide new characterizations for the Myerson value. Finally, we analyze inheritance of properties between the restricted game and the conference game.     

On equilibrium in pure strategies in games with many players

We demonstrate that, if there are sufficiently many players, any Bayesian equilibrium of an incomplete information game can be “ε-purified” . That is, close to any Bayesian equilibrium there is an approximate Bayesian equilibrium in pure strategies. Our main contribution is obtaining this result for games with a countable set of pure strategies. In order to do so we derive a mathematical result, in the spirit of the Shapley–Folkman Theorem, permitting countable strategy sets. Our main assumption is a “large game property,” dictating that the actions of relatively small subsets of players cannot have large affects on the payoffs of other players. E. Cartwright and M. Wooders are indebted to Phillip Reny, Frank Page and two anonymous referees for helpful comments.     

Cooperation in dividing the cake

This paper defines models of cooperation among players partitioning a completely divisible good (such as a cake or a piece of land). The novelty of our approach lies in the players’ ability to form coalitions before the actual division of the good with the aim to maximize the average utility of the coalition. A social welfare function which takes into account coalitions drives the division. In addition, we derive a cooperative game which measures the performance of each coalition. This game is compared with the game in which players start cooperating only after the good has been portioned and has been allocated among the players. We show that a modified version of the game played before the division outperforms the game played after the division.     

Advertising Strategies in a Differential Game with Negative Competitor’s Interference

We consider a duopolistic industry where the current sales of each firm is proportional to its goodwill stock. The evolution of the latter depends positively on own advertising effort and negatively on competitor’s advertising. A standard assumption in the literature in differential games of advertising is that the players remain active throughout the whole (infinite) duration of the game. We relax this assumption and characterize the circumstances under which a firm finds it optimal to remain or exit the industry. Among other things, it is shown that, if both players are “strong”, then the unique Nash equilibrium is the same that one would obtain in the absence of interference from competitor’s advertising. Research supported by Ministry of University and Research of Italy, University of Padua and NSERC, Canada.     

Negotiation-proof Nash equilibrium

This paper defines “negotiation-proof Nash equilibrium', a notion that applies to environments where players can negotiate openly and directly prior to the play of a noncooperative game. It recognizes the possibility that a group of self-interested players may choose, voluntarily and without binding agreement, to coordinate their choice of strategies and make joint objections; moreover, it takes the perfect foresight of rational players fully into account. The merit of the notion of negotiation-proof Nash equilibrium is twofold: (1) It offers a way to rectify the nestedness assumption and myopia embedded in the notion of coalition-proof Nash equilibrium. (2) The negotiation process is formalized by a “graph”, which serves as a natural extension to the approach that models preplay communication by an extensive game. Received: October 1998/Final version: May 2000