Null or nullifying players: The difference between the Shapley value and equal division solutions

A famous solution for cooperative transferable utility games is the Shapley value. Most axiomatic characterizations of this value use some axiom related to null players, i.e. players who contribute zero to any coalition. We show that replacing null players with nullifying players characterizes the equal division solution distributing the worth of the ‘grand coalition’ equally among all players. A player is nullifying if every coalition containing this player earns zero worth. Using invariance we provide similar characterizations of the equal surplus division solution assigning to every player its own worth, and distributing the remaining surplus equally among all players.     

The formation of networks with transfers among players

We examine the formation of networks among a set of players whose payoffs depend on the structure of the network, when players may bargain by promising or demanding transfer payments when forming links. We vary three aspects of the game: (i) whether players can only make transfers to (and receive transfers from) players to whom they are directly linked, or whether they can also subsidize links that they are not directly involved in, (ii) whether or not transfers relating to a given link can be made contingent on the full resulting network or only on the link itself, and (iii) whether or not players can pay other players to refrain from forming links. We characterize the networks that are supported under these variations and show how each of the above aspects either accounts for a specific type of externality, or deals with the combinatorial nature of network payoffs.     

A new axiomatization of the Banzhaf semivalue

A new characterization of the Banzhaf semivalue on the domain of monotonic simple games is given. We use the well-known valuation and dummy axioms plus two additional properties. The first one simply requires that the power-index be bigger for those players belonging to more winning coalitions. The second one is the proportionality axiom introduced by Owen in (1982) which is suitable for those simple games that represent an indirect voting process.     

A strategic implementation of the Average Tree solution for cycle-free graph games

In this note we provide a strategic implementation of the Average Tree solution for zero-monotonic cycle-free graph games. That is, we propose a non-cooperative mechanism of which the unique subgame perfect equilibrium payoffs correspond to the average hierarchical outcome of the game. This mechanism takes into account that a player is only able to communicate with other players (i.e., to make proposals about a division of the surplus of cooperation) when they are connected in the graph.     

Equivalence and axiomatization of solutions for cooperative games with circular communication structure

We study cooperative games with transferable utility and limited cooperation possibilities. The focus is on communication structures where the set of players forms a circle, so that the possibilities of cooperation are represented by the connected sets of nodes of an undirected circular graph. Single-valued solutions are considered which are the average of specific marginal vectors. A marginal vector is deduced from a permutation on the player set and assigns as payoff to a player his marginal contribution when he joins his predecessors in the permutation. We compare the collection of all marginal vectors that are deduced from the permutations in which every player is connected to his immediate predecessor with the one deduced from the permutations in which every player is connected to at least one of his predecessors. The average of the first collection yields the average tree solution and the average of the second one is the Shapley value for augmenting systems. Although the two collections of marginal vectors are different and the second collection contains the first one, it turns out that both solutions coincide on the class of circular graph games. Further, an axiomatization of the solution is given using efficiency, linearity, some restricted dummy property, and some kind of symmetry.     

Coalitional stability under perfect foresight

Summary. We analyze strategic social environments where coalitions can form through binding or nonbinding agreements and actions of a coalition may impose externalities upon the welfare of the rest of the players. We define a solution concept that (1) captures the perfect foresight of the players that has been overlooked in the literature (e.g., Harsanyi [10] and Chwe [6]) and (2) identifies the coalitions that are likely to form and the “stable” outcomes that will not be replaced by any coalition of rational (and hence farsighted) players. The proposed solution concept thereby offers a notion of agreements and coalition formation in complex social environments. Received: February 12, 1996; revised version: March 3, 1997     

Inequality and network structure

We explore the manner in which the structure of a social network constrains the level of inequality that can be sustained among its members, based on the following considerations: (i) any distribution of value must be stable with respect to coalitional deviations, and (ii) the network structure itself determines the coalitions that may form. We show that if players can jointly deviate only if they form a clique in the network, then the degree of inequality that can be sustained depends on the cardinality of the maximum independent set. For bipartite networks, the size of the maximum independent set fully characterizes the degree of inequality that can be sustained. This result extends partially to general networks and to the case in which a group of players can deviate jointly if they are all sufficiently close to each other in the network.     

Non-existence of monotone equilibria in games with correlated signals

Participation in economic games such as auctions is typically costly, which means that players (potential bidders) must consider whether to participate. Such decisions may be no less crucial than how to bid, and yet the literature has been mostly concerned with bidding, assuming an exogenously given number of bidders; see Krishna [Auction Theory, Academic Press, New York, 2002]. Landsberger and Tsirelson [Correlated signals against monotone equilibria, preprint SSRN 222308, Social Science Research Network Electronic Library, May 2000. Available online: http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=222308] have shown that fundamental results established in symmetric auction theory with correlated signals, such as the existence of a monotone equilibrium, may not hold if participation decisions are part of equilibrium. The major goal of this paper is to illustrate and explain this result that may be considered counter intuitive given the emphasis placed on monotone equilibria in the auction literature.     

Contracting with externalities and outside options

This paper proposes a model of multilateral contracting where players are engaged in two parallel interactions: they dynamically form coalitions and play a repeated normal form game with temporary and permanent decisions. We show that when outside options are independent of the actions of other players all Markov perfect equilibrium without coordination failures are efficient, regardless of externalities created by interim actions. Otherwise, in the presence of externalities on outside options, all Markov perfect equilibrium may be inefficient. This formulation encompasses many economic models, and we analyze the distribution of coalitional gains and the dynamics of coalition formation in four illustrative applications.     

The least core, kernel and bargaining sets of large games

Summary. We study the least core, the kernel and bargaining sets of coalitional games with a countable set of players. We show that the least core of a continuous superadditive game with a countable set of players is a non-empty (norm-compact) subset of the space of all countably additive measures. Then we show that in such games the intersection of the prekernel and the least core is non-empty. Finally, we show that the Aumann-Maschler and the Mas-Colell bargaining sets contain the set of all countably additive payoff measures in the prekernel. Received: June 6, 1996; revised version: March 1, 1997     

Ex-post stability of Bayes-Nash equilibria of large games

We present a result on approximate ex-post stability of Bayes-Nash equilibria in semi-anonymous Bayesian games with a large finite number of players. The result allows players? action and type spaces to be general compact metric spaces, thus extending a result by Kalai (2004).     

Group play in games and the role of consent in network formation

We study games played between groups of players, where a given group decides which strategy it will play through a vote by its members. When groups consist of two voting players, our games can also be interpreted as network-formation games. In experiments on Stag Hunt games, we find a stark contrast between how groups and individuals play, with payoffs playing a primary role in equilibrium selection when individuals play, but the structure of the voting rule playing the primary role when groups play. We develop a new solution concept, robust-belief equilibrium, which explains the data that we observe. We provide results showing that this solution concept has application beyond the particular games in our experiments.     

Aggregation of binary evaluations with abstentions

A general model of aggregation of binary evaluations over interrelated issues, introduced by Wilson and further studied by Rubinstein and Fishburn and by the authors, is extended here to allow for abstentions on some of the issues. It is shown that the same structural conditions on the set of feasible evaluations that lead to dictatorship in the model without abstentions, lead to oligarchy in the presence of abstentions. Arrow's impossibility theorem for social welfare functions, Gibbard's oligarchy theorem for quasi-transitive social decision functions, as well as some apparently new theorems on preference aggregation, are obtained as corollaries.     

ON THE NEUTRALITY OF COALITION FORMATION IN A PURE BARGAINING PROBLEM*

We consider the sequential bargaining game à la Stahl–Binmore–Rubinstein with random proposers, juxtaposing an ex ante coalition formation stage to their bargaining game. On the basis of the expected outcomes in the negotiation over how to split a dollar, players can form coalitions in a sequential manner, within each of which they can redistribute their payoffs. It turns out that the grand coalition does form, and that each player receives his discounted expected payoff, which is obtained by playing as a single player in the negotiation, although there could be many equilibria in the bargaining stage.     

Coalitional bargaining games with random proposers: Theory and application

We consider a non-cooperative coalitional bargaining game with random proposers in a general situation for which players differ in recognition probability and time preference. We characterize an efficient equilibrium as the generalized Nash bargaining solution that belongs to the core. The model is applied to wage bargaining between an employer and multiple workers. Although involuntary unemployment may occur in equilibrium, full employment emerges as players become sufficiently patient.     

Markov-perfect Nash equilibria in a class of resource games

Summary. A general model of non-cooperating agents exploiting a renewable resource is considered. Assuming that the resource is sufficiently productive we prove that there exists a continuum of Markov-perfect Nash equilibria (MPNE). Although these equilibria lead to over-exploitation one can approximate the efficient solution by MPNE both in the state space and the payoff space. Furthermore, we derive a necessary and sufficient condition for maximal exploitation of the resource to qualify as a MPNE. This condition is satisfied if there are sufficiently many players, or if the players are sufficiently impatient, or if the capacity of each player is sufficiently high.Received: November 1, 1996This revised version was published online in February 2005 with corrections to the cover date.     

Non-manipulable division rules in claim problems and generalizations

When resources are divided among agents, the characteristics of the agents are taken into consideration. A simple example is the bankruptcy problem, where the liquidation value of a bankrupt firm is divided among the creditors based on their claims. We characterize division rules under which no group of agents can increase the total amount they receive by transferring their characteristics within the group. By allowing agents’ characteristics to be multi-dimensional and choosing the meaning of variables appropriately, our model can subsume a number of existing and new allocation problems, such as cost sharing, social choice with transferable utilities, income redistribution, bankruptcy with multiple types of assets, probability updating, and probability aggregation. A number of existing and new results in specific problems are obtained as corollaries.     

Stable lexicographic rules for shortest path games

For the class of shortest path games, we propose a family of new cost sharing rules satisfying core selection. These rules allocate shares according to some lexicographic preference relation. A computational procedure is provided. Our results relate to those of Tijs et al. (2011).     

Bilateral commitment

We consider non-cooperative environments in which two players have the power to gradually and unilaterally rule out some of their actions. Formally, we embed a strategic-form game into a multi-stage game, in which players can restrict their action spaces in all but the final stage, and select among the remaining actions in the last stage. We say that an action profile is implementable by commitment if this action profile is played in the last stage of a subgame-perfect equilibrium path. We provide a complete characterization of all implementable action profiles and a simple method to find them. It turns out that the set of implementable profiles does not depend on the length of the commitment process. We show, furthermore, that commitments can have social value in the sense that in some games there are implementable action profiles that dominate all Nash equilibria of the original game.