Pure strategy equilibria in games with countable actions

In this paper, we extend the Radner–Rosenthal theorem with finite action spaces on the existence of a pure strategy equilibrium for a finite game to the case that the action space is countable and complete. We also prove the existence of a pure strategy equilibrium for a game with a continuum of players of finite types and with a countable and complete action space. To work with the countably infinite action spaces, we prove some regularity properties on the set of distributions induced by the measurable selections of a correspondence with a countable range by using the Bollobás–Varopoulos extension of the marriage lemma.     

Purification of Bayesian–Nash equilibria in large games with compact type and action spaces

We present a purification result for incomplete information games with a large but finite number of players that allows compact metric spaces for both actions and types. We then compare our framework and findings to the early purification theorems of Rashid (1983. Equilibrium points of non-atomic games: asymptotic results. Economics Letters 12, 7–10), Cartwright and Wooders (2002 On equilibrium in pure strategies in games with many players. University of Warwick Working Paper 686 (revised 2005)), Kalai (2004. Large robust games. Econometrica 72, 1631–1665) and Wooders, Cartwright and Selten (2006. Behavioral conformity in games with many players. Games and Economic Behavior 57, 347–360). Our proofs are elementary and rely on the Shapley–Folkman theorem.     

Revealed preferences of individual players in sequential games

This paper studies rational choice behavior of a player in sequential games of perfect and complete information without an assumption that the other players who join the same games are rational. The model of individually rational choice is defined through a decomposition of the behavioral norm assumed in the subgame perfect equilibria, and we propose a set of axioms on collective choice behavior that characterize the individual rationality obtained as such. As the choice of subgame perfect equilibrium paths is a special case where all players involved in the choice environment are each individually rational, the paper offers testable characterizations of both individual rationality and collective rationality in sequential games.     

Asymptotic interpretations for equilibria of nonatomic games

We show that a mixed equilibrium of a semi-anonymous nonatomic game can be used to generate pure-strategy profiles for finite games randomly generated from the type distribution of the nonatomic game. As the numbers of players involved in the finite games increase, the generated profiles will be asymptotically equilibrium. The converse of this result is also true, i.e., a mixed-strategy profile that is not an equilibrium for the nonatomic game will not be able to achieve the above asymptotic rationality for large finite games. The combined finding can be specialized to situations where the nonatomic game is anonymous and where the given equilibrium is pure. Besides their practical values, these results offer yet one more justification for the study of nonatomic games. They also suggest that efforts may be better spent on searching for mixed rather than pure equilibria of nonatomic games.     

Large but finite games with asymmetric information

Carmona considered an increasing sequence of finite games in each of which players are characterized by payoff functions that are restricted to vary within a uniformly equicontinuous set and choose their strategies from a common compact metric strategy set. Then Carmona proved that each finite game in an upper tail of such a sequence admits an approximate Nash equilibrium in pure strategies.     

Repeated two-person zero-sum games with unequal discounting and private monitoring

We consider discounted repeated two-person zero-sum games with private monitoring. We show that even when players have different and time-varying discount factors, each player’s payoff is equal to his stage-game minmax payoff in every sequential equilibrium. Furthermore, we show that: (a) in every history on the equilibrium path, the pair formed by each player’s conjecture about his opponent’s action must be a Nash equilibrium of the stage game, and (b) the distribution of action profiles in every period is a correlated equilibrium of the stage game. In the particular case of public strategies in public monitoring games, players must play a Nash equilibrium after any public history.     

Convergence to competitive equilibria and elimination of no-trade (in a strategic market game with limit prices)

The strategic market games literature contains many results that predict Walrasian equilibria in the competitive limit. However, they usually come at the expense of ad hoc assumptions that rule out “pathological” no trade equilibria. This paper studies a strategic market game with limit prices. The set of Nash equilibrium allocations of this game converges to the set containing all competitive equilibria and no-trade, when players are replicated. Moreover, two rounds of iterated deletion of weakly dominated strategies eliminate the no-trade equilibria. Hence, replication paired with two rounds of iterated dominance gives a clean prediction of competitive equilibrium.     

Strategic behavior in non-atomic games

In order to remedy the possible loss of strategic interaction in non-atomic games with a societal choice, this study proposes a refinement of Nash equilibrium, strategic equilibrium. Given a non-atomic game, its perturbed game is one in which every player believes that he alone has a small, but positive, impact on the societal choice; and a distribution is a strategic equilibrium if it is a limit point of a sequence of Nash equilibrium distributions of games in which each player’s belief about his impact on the societal choice goes to zero. After proving the existence of strategic equilibria, we show that all of them must be Nash. We also show that all regular equilibria of smooth non-atomic games are strategic. Moreover, it is displayed that in many economic applications, the set of strategic equilibria coincides with that of Nash equilibria of large finite games.     

What restrictions do Bayesian games impose on the value of information?

In a Bayesian game players play an unknown game. Before the game starts some players may receive a signal regarding the specific game actually played. Typically, information structures that determine different signals, induce different equilibrium payoffs. In two-person zero-sum games the equilibrium payoff measures the value of the particular information structure which induces it. We pose a question as to what restrictions Bayesian games impose on the value of information. We provide answers for two kinds of information structures: symmetric, where both players are equally informed, and one-sided, where only one player is informed.     

Simple collective equilibria in stopping games

At each moment in time, an alternative from a finite set is selected by a stochastic process. Players observe the selected alternative and sequentially cast a yes or a no vote. If the set of players casting a yes vote is decisive for the selected alternative, it is accepted and the game ends. Otherwise the next period begins. We refer to this class of problems as stopping games. Collective choice games, quitting games, and coalition formation games are particular examples. When the core of a stopping game is non-empty, a subgame perfect equilibrium in pure stationary strategies is shown to exist. But in general, even subgame perfect equilibria in mixed stationary strategies may not exist. We show that aggregate voting behavior can be summarized by a collective strategy. We insist on pure strategies, allow for simple forms of punishment, and provide a constructive proof to show that so-called two-step simple collective equilibria always exist. This implies the existence of a pure strategy subgame perfect equilibrium. We apply our approach to the case with three alternatives exhibiting a Condorcet cycle and to a model of redistributive politics.     

Equilibria in a class of aggregative location games

Consider a multimarket oligopoly, where firms have a single license that allows them to supply exactly one market out of a given set of markets. How does the restriction to supply only one market influence the existence of equilibria in the game? To answer this question, we study a general class of aggregative location games where a strategy of a player is to choose simultaneously both a location out of a finite set and a non-negative quantity out of a compact interval. The utility of each player is assumed to depend solely on the chosen location, the chosen quantity, and the aggregated quantity of all other players on the chosen location. We show that each game in this class possesses a pure Nash equilibrium whenever the players’ utility functions satisfy the assumptions negative externality, decreasing marginal utility, continuity, and Location–Symmetry. We also provide examples exhibiting that, if one of the assumptions is violated, a pure Nash equilibrium may fail to exist.     

Solutions for cooperative games with r alternatives

We consider games with n players and r alternatives. In these games each player must choose one and only one alternative, reaching an ordered partition of the set of players. An extension of the Shapley value to this framework is studied. Received: 1 November 1997 / Accepted: 24 January 1999     

Strong Nash equilibrium in games with common and complementary local utilities

A rather general class of strategic games is described where the coalitional improvements are acyclic and hence strong Nash equilibria exist: The players derive their utilities from the use of certain facilities; all players using a facility extract the same amount of local utility therefrom, which amount depends both on the set of users and on their actions, and is decreasing in the set of users; the ultimate utility of each player is the minimum of the local utilities at all relevant facilities. Two important subclasses are “games with structured utilities,” basic properties of which were discovered in 1970s and 1980s, and “bottleneck congestion games,” which attracted researchers’ attention quite recently. The former games are representative in the sense that every game from the whole class is isomorphic to one of them. The necessity of the minimum aggregation for the existence of strong Nash equilibria, actually, just Pareto optimal Nash equilibria, in all games of this type is established.     

Robust games: theory and application to a Cournot duopoly model

In this paper, the robust game model proposed by Aghassi and Bertsimas (Math Program Ser B 107:231–273, 2006) for matrix games is extended to games with a broader class of payoff functions. This is a distribution-free model of incomplete information for finite games where players adopt a robust-optimization approach to contend with payoff uncertainty. They are called robust players and seek the maximum guaranteed payoff given the strategy of the others. Consistently with this decision criterion, a set of strategies is an equilibrium, robust-optimization equilibrium, if each player’s strategy is a best response to the other player’s strategies, under the worst-case scenarios. The aim of the paper is twofold. In the first part, we provide robust-optimization equilibrium’s existence result for a quite general class of games and we prove that it exists a suitable value \(\epsilon \) such that robust-optimization equilibria are a subset of \(\epsilon \)-Nash equilibria of the nominal version, i.e., without uncertainty, of the robust game. This provides a theoretical motivation for the robust approach, as it provides new insight and a rational agent motivation for \(\epsilon \)-Nash equilibrium. In the last part, we propose an application of the theory to a classical Cournot duopoly model which shows significant differences between the robust game and its nominal version.     

Is having a unique equilibrium robust?

We investigate whether having a unique equilibrium (or a given number of equilibria) is robust to perturbation of the payoffs, both for Nash equilibrium and correlated equilibrium. We show that the set of n  -player finite games with a unique correlated equilibrium is open, while this is not true of Nash equilibrium for n>2$n>2$. The crucial lemma is that a unique correlated equilibrium is a quasi-strict Nash equilibrium. Related results are studied. For instance, we show that generic two-person zero-sum games have a unique correlated equilibrium and that, while the set of symmetric bimatrix games with a unique symmetric Nash equilibrium is not open, the set of symmetric bimatrix games with a unique and quasi-strict symmetric Nash equilibrium is.     

Hierarchies of beliefs and the belief-invariant Bayesian solution

The belief-invariant Bayesian solution is a notion of correlated equilibrium in games with incomplete information proposed by Forges (1993), and hierarchy of beliefs over conditional beliefs is introduced by Ely and Peski (2006) in their study of interim independent rationalizability. We study the connection between the two concepts. We partially characterize the correlations embedded among type spaces with the same set of hierarchies of beliefs over conditional beliefs with partially correlating devices, which send correlated signals to players in a way that preserves each player’s belief about others’ types. Since the belief-invariant Bayesian solution is also implemented by such correlating devices, we then establish that it is invariant on equivalent type space.     

On a theorem of Schmeidler

Over a decade ago D. Schmeidler (1973) introduced a concept of non-cooperative equilibrium for games with a continuum of agents and, under a restriction on the payoff functions, established the existence of an equilibrium in pure strategies. The purpose of this note is to reformalize the model and the equilibrium notion of Schmeidler in terms of distributions rather than measurable functions. We shall see how once the definitions are available we get (pure strategy) equilibrium existence theorems quite effortlessly and under general conditions. A number of remarks contain applications to, among others, incomplete information games.     

Non-cooperative games on hyperfinite Loeb spaces

We present a particular class of measure spaces, hyperfinite Loeb spaces, as a model of situations where individual players are strategically negligible, as in large non-anonymous games, or where information is diffused, as in games with imperfect information. We present results on the existence of Nash equilibria in both kinds of games. Our results cover the case when the action sets are taken to be the unit interval, results now known to be false when they are based on more familiar measure spaces such as the Lebesgue unit interval. We also emphasize three criteria for the modelling of such game-theoretic situations—asymptotic implementability, homogeneity and measurability—and argue for games on hyperfinite Loeb spaces on the basis of these criteria. In particular, we show through explicit examples that a sequence of finite games with an increasing number of players or sample points cannot always be represented by a limit game on a Lebesgue space, and even when it can be so represented, the limit of an existing approximate equilibrium may disappear in the limit game. Thus, games on hyperfinite Loeb spaces constitute the ‘right' model even if one is primarily interested in capturing the asymptotic nature of large but finite game-theoretic phenomena.