The semireactive bargaining set of a cooperative game

The semireactive bargaining set, a solution for cooperative games, is introduced. This solution is in general a subsolution of the bargaining set and a supersolution of the reactive bargaining set. However, on various classes of transferable utility games the semireactive and the reactive bargaining set coincide. The semireactive prebargaining set on TU games can be axiomatized by one-person rationality, the reduced game property, a weak version of the converse reduced game property with respect to subgrand coalitions, and subgrand stability. Furthermore, it is shown that there is a suitable weakening of subgrand stability, which allows to characterize the prebargaining set. Replacing the reduced game by the imputation saving reduced game and employing individual rationality as an additional axiom yields characterizations of both, the bargaining set and the semireactive bargaining set. Received September 2000/Revised version June 2001     

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.     

Uncovered bargaining solutions

An uncovered bargaining solution is a bargaining solution for which there exists a complete and asymmetric relation (tournament) such that, for each feasible set, the bargaining solution set coincides with the uncovered set of the tournament. We provide a characterization of a class of uncovered bargaining solutions.     

A new binary relation to compare viability of winning coalitions and its interrelationships to desirability relation and blockability relation

This paper aims to propose a new type of binary relations, called the viability relation, defined on the set of all coalitions in a simple game for a comparison of coalition influence, and to investigate its properties, especially its interrelationships to the desirability relation and the blockability relation. The viability relation is defined to compare coalitions based on their robustness over deviation of their members for complementing the inability of the desirability relation and the blockability relation to make a distinguishable comparison among winning coalitions. It is verified in this paper that the viability relation on a simple game is always transitive and is complete if and only if the simple game is S-unanimous for a coalition S. Examples show that there are no general inclusion relations among the desirability relation, the blockability relation and the viability relation. It is also verified that the viability relation and the blockability relation are complementary to each other. Specifically, the blockability relation between two coalitions is equivalent to the inversed viability relation between the complements of the two coalitions.     

On the implementation of the L-Nash bargaining solution in two-person bargaining games

The “Nash program” initiated by Nash (Econometrica 21:128–140, 1953) is a research agenda aiming at representing every axiomatically determined cooperative solution to a game as a Nash outcome of a reasonable noncooperative bargaining game. The L-Nash solution first defined by Forgó (Interactive Decisions. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, vol 229. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–15, 1983) is obtained as the limiting point of the Nash bargaining solution when the disagreement point goes to negative infinity in a fixed direction. In Forgó and Szidarovszky (Eur J Oper Res 147:108–116, 2003), the L-Nash solution was related to the solution of multiciteria decision making and two different axiomatizations of the L-Nash solution were also given in this context. In this paper, finite bounds are established for the penalty of disagreement in certain special two-person bargaining problems, making it possible to apply all the implementation models designed for Nash bargaining problems with a finite disagreement point to obtain the L-Nash solution as well. For another set of problems where this method does not work, a version of Rubinstein’s alternative offer game (Econometrica 50:97–109, 1982) is shown to asymptotically implement the L-Nash solution. If penalty is internalized as a decision variable of one of the players, then a modification of Howard’s game (J Econ Theory 56:142–159, 1992) also implements the L-Nash solution.     

Labor unions and Nash bargaining using coalition formation games

In this paper we examine the properties of stable coalitions under sequential and simultaneous bargaining by competing labor unions. We do this using the Nash bargaining solution and various notions of stability, namely, Nash, coalitional, contractual and core stability.     

A simple “market value” bargaining model for weighted voting games: characterization and limit theorems

We offer a bargaining model for weighted voting games that is a close relative of the nucleolus and the kernel. We look for a set of weights that preserves winning coalitions that has the property of minimizing the difference between the weight of the smallest and the weight of the largest Minimum Winning Coalition. We claim that such a set of weights provides an a priori measure of a weighted voter’s bribeworthiness or market value. After introducing our model, we provide a characterization result for this model and show its links to other bargaining model approaches in the literature. Then we offer some limit results showing that, with certain reasonable conditions on the distributions of weights, as the size of the voting body increases, the values of bribeworthiness we calculate will approach both the weights themselves and the Banzhaf scores for the weighted voting game. We also show that, even for relatively small groups using weighted voting, such as the membership of the European Council of Ministers (and its predecessors) 1958–2003, similarities among the usual a priori power scores, bribeworthiness/market value, and the weights themselves, will be quite strong.     

Sequential share bargaining

This paper presents a new extension of the Rubinstein-St?hl bargaining model to the case with n players, called sequential share bargaining. The bargaining protocol is natural and has as its main feature that the players’ shares in the surplus are determined sequentially rather than simultaneously. The protocol also assumes orderly voting, a restriction on the order in which players respond to a proposal. The bargaining protocol requires unanimous agreement for proposals to be implemented. Unlike all existing bargaining protocols with unanimous agreement, the resulting game has unique subgame perfect equilibrium utilities for any value of the discount factor. The result builds on the analysis of so-called one-dimensional bargaining problems. We show that also one-dimensional bargaining problems have unique subgame perfect equilibrium utilities for any value of the discount factor.     

Relative impatience determines preference between contract bargaining and repeated bargaining

In this paper we consider the effect of the `impatience ratio' I (of the worker discount factor to the firm discount factor) on the preferences of the players between two bargaining schemes in an asymmetric information wage bargaining context. The firm has private information about the worker's value and the worker makes wage demands. In the contact bargaining scheme, a wage demand which is accepted in one period is binding for all future periods (and hence the bargaining ends after acceptance of a wage demand). In the repeated bargaining scheme, the parties continue to bargain irrespective of whether the worker has been hired or not, and any accepted wage demand is only valid for the period in which it was accepted. We establish the following results under the assumption that the worker's value is uniformly distributed on an interval: When the firm is more patient than the worker (I<1) both parties prefer contract bargaining, and when the worker is more patient than the firm (I >1) both prefer repeated bargaining. For any value of I, the preferred type of bargaining gives the lower unemployment.  The work of Bae has already shown that when players are equally patient (I=1) the players are indifferent between the two schemes, regardless of the distribution of the worker's value. This paper shows that Bae's indifference result (Bae, 1991) cannot be extended to unequally patient players. Received: December 1996/Final version: October 1998     

A characterization of convex games by means of bargaining sets

The aim of the paper is to characterize the classical convexity notion for cooperative TU games by means of the Mas-Colell and the Davis–Maschler bargaining sets. A new set of payoff vectors is introduced and analyzed: the max-Weber set. This set is defined as the convex hull of the max-marginal worth vectors. The characterizations of convexity are reached by comparing the classical Weber set, the max-Weber set and a selected bargaining set.     

The reactive bargaining set: Structure, dynamics and extension to NTU games

The reactive bargaining set (Granot [1994]) is the set of outcomes for which no justified objection exists. Here, in a justified objection the objector first watches how the target tries to act (if he has such an option), and then reacts by making a profit and ruining the target's attempt to maintain his share. In this paper we explore properties of the reactive bargaining set, set up the system of inequalities that defines it, and construct a dynamic system in the sense of Stearns' transfer scheme that leads the players to this set. We also extend the definition of the reactive bargaining set toNTU games in a way that keeps it nonempty. To shed light on its nature and its relative ease of computation, we compute the reactive bargaining set for games that played important role in the game theory literature.     

The core and the bargaining set in glove-market games

In a glove-market game, the worth of a coalition is defined as the minimum, over all commodities in the market, of the total quantity that the coalition owns of each commodity. We identify a subclass of these games for which the core and the bargaining set coincide with the set of competitive equilibrium outcomes. We present examples showing that these solution concepts differ outside that subclass. We also illustrate a peculiar behavior of the bargaining set with respect to replication of a glove-market. These examples provide a simple economic setting in which the merits of the various solution concepts may be discussed and compared.Correspondence with Michael Maschler is gratefully acknowledged.This authors work was partly done while visiting the Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Research supported by the Fund for the Promotion of Research at the Technion.     

Fuzzy extensions of bargaining sets and their existence in cooperative fuzzy games

Recently, the concept of classical bargaining set given by Aumann and Maschler in 1964 has been extended to fuzzy bargaining set. In this paper, we give a modification to correct some weakness of this extension. We also extend the concept of the Mas-Colell's bargaining set (the other major type of bargaining sets) to its corresponding fuzzy bargaining set. Our main effort is to prove existence theorems for these two types of fuzzy bargaining sets. We will also give necessary and sufficient conditions for these bargaining sets to coincide with the Aubin Core in a continuous superadditive cooperative fuzzy game which has a crisp maximal coalition of maximum excess at each payoff vector. We show that both Aumann-Maschler and Mas-Colell fuzzy bargaining sets of a continuous convex cooperative fuzzy game coincide with its Aubin core.     

The generalized Nash bargaining solution and Incentive Compatible Mechanisms

In this paper I analyze whether the generalized Nash solution which has been defined by Harsanyi and Selten for bargaining problems with incomplete information can be characterized in the mechanism framework introduced by Myerson.I show that the solution is uniquely determined by a set of axioms in the case of independently distributed types. It can be seen that the axioms given by Harsanyi and Selten cannot be used if the types are not independently distributed.     

Multiple-issue bargaining and axiomatic solutions

We study two-person, multiple-issue bargaining problems and identify four procedures by which the bargaining may take place. Drawing on some logic from non-cooperative game theory, we propose axioms which relate the outcomes of the procedures. We also promote a weak monotonicity axiom on solutions, called issue-by-issue monotonicity, which is geared toward multiple-issue bargaining. Our main result concerns the relationship between a sequential bargaining procedure — with the rule that agreements are implemented only after all issues are resolved — and global bargaining (in which all issues are negotiated simultaneously). If a bargaining solution predicts the same outcome with these two procedures, then we say that it satisfiesagenda independence. We prove that a solution satisfies axioms of efficiency, symmetry, scale invariance, issue-by-issue monotonicity, and agenda independence if and only if it is the Nash solution. This result provides new intuition for Nash's independence of irrelevant alternatives axiom. Among other results, we show that a solution is invariant to all four of the procedures and satisfies efficiency and symmetry if and only if it is the utilitarian solution with equal weights. We comment on the results of other authors who address multiple-issue bargaining.     

The bargaining set of four-person balanced games

It is well known that in three-person transferable-utility cooperative games the bargaining set ℳⁱ ₁ and the core coincide for any coalition structure, provided the latter solution is not empty. In contrast, five-person totally-balanced games are discussed in the literature in which the bargaining set ℳⁱ ₁ (for the grand coalition) is larger then the core. This paper answers the equivalence question in the remaining four-person case. We prove that in any four-person game and for arbitrary coalition structure, whenever the core is not empty, it coincides with the bargaining set ℳⁱ ₁. Our discussion employs a generalization of balancedness to games with coalition structures. Received: August 2001/Revised version: April 2002     

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.     

Methods for comparison of coalition influence on games in characteristic function form and their interrelationships

This paper extends two existent methods, called the blockability relation and the viability relation, for simple games to compare influence of coalitions, to those for games in characteristic function form, and shows that the newly defined relations satisfy transitivity and completeness. It is shown in this paper that for every game in characteristic function form the blockability relation and the viability relation have a complementary interrelationship.     

Asymptotic stability and other properties of trajectories and transfer sequences leading to the bargaining sets

The foundation of a dynamic theory for the bargaining sets started withStearns, when he constructed transfer sequences which always converge to appropriate bargaining sets. A continuous analogue was developed byBillera, where sequences where replaced by solutions of systems of differential equations. In this paper we show that the nucleolus is locally asymptotically stable both with respect toStearns' sequences andBillera's solutions if and only if it is an isolated point of the appropriate bargaining set. No other point of the bargaining set can be locally asymptotically stable. Furthermore, it is always stable in these processes. As by-products of the study we derive the results ofBillera andStearns in a different fashion. We also show that along the non-trivial trajectories and sequences, the vector of the excesses of the payoffs, arranged in a non-increasing order, always decreases lexicographically, thus each bargaining set can be viewed as resulting from a certain monotone process operating on the payoff vectors.