Strong equilibria in games with the lexicographical improvement property

We study a class of finite strategic games with the property that every deviation of a coalition of players that is profitable to each of its members strictly decreases the lexicographical order of a certain function defined on the set of strategy profiles. We call this property the lexicographical improvement property (LIP) and show that, in finite games, it is equivalent to the existence of a generalized strong potential function. We use this characterization to derive existence, efficiency and fairness properties of strong equilibria (SE). As our main result, we show that an important class of games that we call bottleneck congestion games has the LIP and thus the above mentioned properties. For infinite games, the LIP does neither imply the existence of a generalized strong potential nor the existence of SE. We therefore introduce the slightly more general concept of the pairwise LIP and prove that whenever the pairwise LIP is satisfied for a continuous function, then there exists a SE. As a consequence, we show that splittable bottleneck congestion games with continuous facility cost functions possess a SE.     

Hedonic coalition formation games: A new stability notion

This paper studies hedonic coalition formation games where each player’s preferences rely only upon the members of her coalition. A new stability notion under free exit-free entry membership rights, referred to as strong Nash stability, is introduced which is stronger than both core and Nash stabilities studied earlier in the literature. Strong Nash stability has an analogue in non-cooperative games and it is the strongest stability notion appropriate to the context of hedonic coalition formation games. The weak top-choice property is introduced and shown to be sufficient for the existence of a strongly Nash stable partition. It is also shown that descending separable preferences guarantee the existence of a strongly Nash stable partition. Strong Nash stability under different membership rights is also studied.     

Hedonic coalition formation games with variable populations: core characterizations and (im)possibilities

We consider hedonic coalition formation games with variable sets of agents and extend the properties competition sensitivity and resource sensitivity (introduced by Klaus, Games Econ Behav 72:172–186, 2011, for roommate markets) to hedonic coalition formation games. Then, we show that on the domain of solvable hedonic coalition formation games, the Core is characterized by coalitional unanimity and Maskin monotonicity (see also Takamiya, Maskin monotonic coalition formation rules respecting group rights. Niigata University, Mimeo, 2010, Theorem 1). Next, we characterize the Core for solvable hedonic coalition formation games by unanimity, Maskin monotonicity, and either competition sensitivity or resource sensitivity (Corollary 2). Finally, and in contrast to roommate markets, we show that on the domain of solvable hedonic coalition formation games, there exists a solution not equal to the Core that satisfies coalitional unanimity, consistency, competition sensitivity, and resource sensitivity (Example 2).     

Computational complexity in additive hedonic games

We investigate the computational complexity of several decision problems in hedonic coalition formation games and demonstrate that attaining stability in such games remains NP-hard even when they are additive. Precisely, we prove that when either core stability or strict core stability is under consideration, the existence problem of a stable coalition structure is NP-hard in the strong sense. Furthermore, the corresponding decision problems with respect to the existence of a Nash stable coalition structure and of an individually stable coalition structure turn out to be NP-complete in the strong sense.     

Harsanyi power solutions for graph-restricted games

We consider cooperative transferable utility games, or simply TU-games, with limited communication structure in which players can cooperate if and only if they are connected in the communication graph. Solutions for such graph games can be obtained by applying standard solutions to a modified or restricted game that takes account of the cooperation restrictions. We discuss Harsanyi solutions which distribute dividends such that the dividend shares of players in a coalition are based on power measures for nodes in corresponding communication graphs. We provide axiomatic characterizations of the Harsanyi power solutions on the class of cycle-free graph games and on the class of all graph games. Special attention is given to the Harsanyi degree solution which equals the Shapley value on the class of complete graph games and equals the position value on the class of cycle-free graph games. The Myerson value is the Harsanyi power solution that is based on the equal power measure. Finally, various applications are discussed.     

Noncooperative formation of coalitions in hedonic games

We study a bargaining procedure of coalition formation in the class of hedonic games, where players’ preferences depend solely on the coalition they belong to. We provide an example of nonexistence of a pure strategy stationary perfect equilibrium, and a necessary and sufficient condition for existence. We show that when the game is totally stable (the game and all its restrictions have a nonempty core), there always exists a no-delay equilibrium generating core outcomes. Other equilibria exhibiting delay or resulting in unstable outcomes can also exist. If the core of the hedonic game and its restrictions always consist of a single point, we show that the bargaining game admits a unique stationary perfect equilibrium, resulting in the immediate formation of the core coalition structure.     

Forms of representation for simple games: Sizes,conversions and equivalences

Simple games are cooperative games in which the benefit that a coalition may have is always binary, i.e., a coalition may either win or loose. This paper surveys different forms of representation of simple games, and those for some of their subfamilies like regular games and weighted games. We analyze the forms of representations that have been proposed in the literature based on different data structures for sets of sets. We provide bounds on the computational resources needed to transform a game from one form of representation to another one. This includes the study of the problem of enumerating the fundamental families of coalitions of a simple game. In particular we prove that several changes of representation that require exponential time can be solved with polynomial-delay and highlight some open problems.     

On coalition formation: a game-theoretical approach

This paper deals with the question of coalition formation inn-person cooperative games. Two abstract game models of coalition formation are proposed. We then study the core and the dynamic solution of these abstract games. These models assume that there is a rule governing the allocation of payoffs to each player in each coalition structure called a payoff solution concept. The predictions of these models are characterized for the special case of games with side payments using various payoff solution concepts such as the individually rational payoffs, the core, the Shapley value and the bargaining set M₁ ⁽ⁱ⁾. Some modifications of these models are also discussed.     

Compensations in the Shapley value and the compensation solutions for graph games

We consider an alternative expression of the Shapley value that reveals a system of compensations: each player receives an equal share of the worth of each coalition he belongs to, and has to compensate an equal share of the worth of any coalition he does not belong to. We give a representation in terms of formation of the grand coalition according to an ordering of the players and define the corresponding compensation vector. Then, we generalize this idea to cooperative games with a communication graph in order to construct new allocation rules called the compensation solutions. Firstly, we consider cooperative games with arbitrary graphs and construct rooted spanning trees (see Demange, J Political Econ 112:754–778, 2004) instead of orderings of the players by using the classical algorithms DFS and BFS. If the graph is complete, we show that the compensation solutions associated with DFS and BFS coincide with the Shapley value and the equal surplus division respectively. Secondly, we consider cooperative games with a forest (cycle-free graph) and all its rooted spanning trees. The compensation solution is characterized by component efficiency and relative fairness. The latter axiom takes into account the relative position of a player with respect to his component in the communication graph.     

A unifying model for matrix-based pairing situations

We present a unifying framework for transferable utility coalitional games that are derived from a non-negative matrix in which every entry represents the value obtained by combining the corresponding row and column. We assume that every row and every column is associated with a player, and that every player is associated with at most one row and at most one column. The instances arising from this framework are called pairing games, and they encompass assignment games and permutation games as two polar cases. We show that the core of a pairing game is always non-empty by proving that the set of pairing games coincides with the set of permutation games. Then we exploit the wide range of situations comprised in our framework to investigate the relationship between pairing games that have different player sets, but are defined by the same underlying matrix. We show that the core and the set of extreme core allocations are immune to the merging of a row player with a column player. Moreover, the core is also immune to the reverse manipulation, i.e., to the splitting of a player into a row player and a column player. Other common solution concepts fail to be either merging-proof or splitting-proof in general.     

Topological games and continuity of group operations

We consider a topological game GΠ involving two players α and β and show that, for a paratopological group, the absence of a winning strategy for player β implies the group is a topological one. We provide a large class of topological spaces X for which the absence of a winning strategy for player β is equivalent to the requirement that X is a Baire space. This allows to extend the class of paratopological or semitopological groups for which one can prove that they are, actually, topological groups.Conditions of the type “existence of a winning strategy for the player α” or “absence of a winning strategy for the player β” are frequently used in mathematics. Though convenient and satisfactory for theoretical considerations, such conditions do not reveal much about the internal structure of the topological space where they hold. We show that the existence of a winning strategy for any of the players in all games of Banach-Mazur type can be expressed in terms of “saturated sieves” of open sets.     

Share functions for cooperative games with levels structure of cooperation

In a standard TU-game it is assumed that every subset of the player set N can form a coalition and earn its worth. One of the first models where restrictions in cooperation are considered is the one of games with coalition structure of Aumann and Drèze (1974). They assumed that the player set is partitioned into unions and that players can only cooperate within their own union. Owen (1977) introduced a value for games with coalition structure under the assumption that also the unions can cooperate among them. Winter (1989) extended this value to games with levels structure of cooperation, which consists of a game and a finite sequence of partitions defined on the player set, each of them being coarser than the previous one.     

Dimension of complete simple games with minimum

Weighted majority games have the property that players are totally ordered by the desirability relation (introduced by Isbell in [J.R. Isbell, A class of majority games, Quarterly Journal of Mathematics, 7 (1956) 183–187]) because weights induce it. Games for which this relation is total are called complete simple games. Taylor and Zwicker proved in [A.D. Taylor, W.S. Zwicker, Weighted voting, multicameral representation, and power, Games and Economic Behavior 5 (1993) 170–181] that every simple game (or monotonic finite hypergraph) can be represented by an intersection of weighted majority games and consider the dimension of a game as the needed minimum number of them to get it. They provide the existence of non-complete simple games of every dimension and left open the problem for complete simple games.     

Coalitional unanimity versus strategy-proofness in coalition formation problems

This paper examines coalition formation problems from the viewpoint of mechanism design. We consider the case where (i) the list of feasible coalitions (those coalitions which are permitted to form) is given in advance; and (ii) each individual’s preference is a ranking over those feasible coalitions which include this individual. We are interested in requiring the mechanism to guarantee each coalition the “right” of forming that coalition at least when every member of the coalition ranks the coalition at the top. We name this property coalitional unanimity. We examine the compatibility between coalitional unanimity and incentive requirements, and prove that if the mechanism is strategy-proof and respects coalitional unanimity, then for each preference profile, there exists at most one strictly core stable partition, and the mechanism chooses such a partition whenever available. Further, the mechanism is coalition strategy-proof and respects coalitional unanimity if, and only if, the strictly core stable partition uniquely exists for every preference profile.     

Distributionally robust chance-constrained games: existence and characterization of Nash equilibrium

We consider an n-player finite strategic game. The payoff vector of each player is a random vector whose distribution is not completely known. We assume that the distribution of a random payoff vector of each player belongs to a distributional uncertainty set. We define a distributionally robust chance-constrained game using worst-case chance constraint. We consider two types of distributional uncertainty sets. We show the existence of a mixed strategy Nash equilibrium of a distributionally robust chance-constrained game corresponding to both types of distributional uncertainty sets. For each case, we show a one-to-one correspondence between a Nash equilibrium of a game and a global maximum of a certain mathematical program.     

Probabilities of Pure Nash Equilibria in Matrix Games when the Payoff Entries of One Player Are Randomly Selected

The Nash equilibrium in pure strategies represents an important solution concept in nonzero sum matrix games. Existence of Nash equilibria in games with known and with randomly selected payoff entries have been studied extensively. In many real games, however, a player may know his own payoff entries but not the payoff entries of the other player. In this paper, we consider nonzero sum matrix games where the payoff entries of one player are known, but the payoff entries of the other player are assumed to be randomly selected. We are interested in determining the probabilities of existence of pure Nash equilibria in such games. We characterize these probabilities by first determining the finite space of ordinal matrix games that corresponds to the infinite space of matrix games with random entries for only one player. We then partition this space into mutually exclusive spaces that correspond to games with no Nash equilibria and with r Nash equilibria. In order to effectively compute the sizes of these spaces, we introduce the concept of top-rated preferences minimal ordinal games. We then present a theorem which provides a mechanism for computing the number of games in each of these mutually exclusive spaces, which then can be used to determine the probabilities. Finally, we summarize the results by deriving the probabilities of existence of unique, nonunique, and no Nash equilibria, and we present an illustrative example.     

The Nakamura Theorem for coalition structures of quota games

This paper considers a model of society $S$ with a finite number of individuals,n, a finite set off alternatives, Ω effective coalitions that must contain ana priori given numberq of individuals. Its purpose is to extend the Nakamura Theorem (1979) to the quota games where individuals are allowed to form groups of sizeq which are smaller than the grand coalition. Our main result determines the upper bound on the number of alternatives which would guarantee, for a given e andq, the existence of a stable coalition structure for any profile of complete transitive preference relations. Our notion of stability, $S$ -equilibrium, introduced by Greenberg-Weber (1993), combines bothfree entry andfree mobility and represents the natural extension of the core to improper or non-superadditive games where coalition structures, and not only the grand coalition, are allowed to form.     

Suboptimality of M-step back strategies in Bayesian games

We consider the Bayes optimal strategy for repeated two player games where moves are made simultaneously. In these games we look at models where one player assumes that the other player is employing a strategy depending only on the previousm-move pairs (as discussed in Wilson, 1986). We show that, under very unrestrictive conditions, such an assumption is not consistent with the assumption of rationality of one's opponent. Indeed, we show that by employing such a model a player is implicitly assuming that his opponent is not playing rationally,with probability one. We argue that, in the context of experimental games, thesem-step back models must be inferior to models which are consistent with the assumption that an opponent can be rational.     

The collective value: a new solution for games with coalition structures

In this study, we provide a new solution for cooperative games with coalition structures. The collective value of a player is defined as the sum of the equal division of the pure surplus obtained by his coalition from the coalitional bargaining and of his Shapley value for the internal coalition. The weighted Shapley value applied to a game played by coalitions with coalition-size weights is assigned to each coalition, reflecting the size asymmetries among coalitions. We show that the collective value matches exogenous interpretations of coalition structures and provide an axiomatic foundation of this value. A noncooperative mechanism that implements the collective value is also presented.