Pareto-undominated and socially-maximal equilibria in non-atomic games

This paper makes the observation that a finite Bayesian game with diffused and disparate private information can be conceived of as a large game with a non-atomic continuum of players. By using this observation as its methodological point of departure, it shows that (i) a Bayes–Nash equilibrium (BNE) exists in a finite Bayesian game with private information if and only if a Nash equilibrium exists in the induced large game, and (ii) both Pareto-undominated and socially-maximal BNE exist in finite Bayesian games with private information. In particular, it shows these results to be a direct consequence of results for a version of a large game re-modeled for situations where different players may have different action sets.     

Determinacy of equilibrium in outcome game forms

We show the generic finiteness of the number of probability distributions on outcomes induced by Nash equilibria for two-person game forms such that either (i) one of the players has no more than two strategies or (ii) both of the players have three strategies, and (iii) for outcome game forms with three players, each with at most two strategies. Finally, we exhibit an example of a game form with three outcomes and three players for which the Nash equilibria of the associated game induce a continuum of payoffs for an open non-empty set of utility profiles.     

Coalitional games with veto players: Consistency, monotonicity and Nash outcomes

Following Dagan et al. [Dagan, N., Volij, O., Serrano, R. (1997). A non-cooperative view on consistent bankruptcy rules, Games Econ. Behav. 18, 55–72], we construct an extensive form game for veto-balanced TU games in which a veto player is the proposer and the other players are responders. The set of Nash outcomes of this extensive form game is described, and compared to solutions of TU games such as the nucleolus, kernel and egalitarian core. We find necessary and sufficient conditions under which the nucleolus of the game is a Nash outcome.     

An evolutionary model with best response and imitative rules

We formulate an evolutionary oligopoly model where quantity setting players produce following either the static expectation best response or a performance-proportional imitation rule. The choice on how to behave is driven by an evolutionary selection mechanism according to which the rule that brought the highest performance attracts more followers. The model has a stationary state that represents a heterogeneous population where rational and imitative rules coexist and where players produce at the Cournot–Nash level. We find that the intensity of choice, a parameter representing the evolutionary propensity to switch to the most profitable rule, the cost of the best response implementation as well as the number of players have ambiguous roles in determining the stability property of the Cournot–Nash equilibrium. This marks important differences with most of the results from evolutionary models and oligopoly competitions. Such differences should be referred to the particular imitative behavior we consider in the present modeling setup. Moreover, the global analysis of the model reveals that the above-mentioned parameters introduce further elements of complexity, conditioning the convergence toward an inner attractor. In particular, even when the Cournot–Nash equilibrium loses its stability, outputs of players little differ from the Cournot–Nash level and most of the dynamics is due to wide variations of imitators’ relative fraction. This describes dynamic scenarios where shares of players produce more or less at the same level alternating their decision mechanisms.     

Property rights out of anarchy? The Demsetz hypothesis in a game of conflict

The Demsetz hypothesis states that secure claims to property arise when the value of creating those rights is sufficiently high. This paper examines the conditions under which this holds in an anarchy equilibrium in which players may allocate labor to production, to conflict, or to the public good of secure claims to property protection. In a simultaneous choice Nash equilibrium, no secure claims to property are created. However, if players play a sequential choice game in which secure claims to property protection occurs in the first stage, then the strategic benefit of reducing others’ subsequent conflict allocation causes secure claims to property to arise. Secure claims to property in a social contract are imperfect, but for sufficiently high productivity of resources, the social contract welfare dominates autocracy.     

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.     

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.     

The stochastic lake game: A numerical solution

In this paper, we numerically solve a stochastic dynamic programming problem for the solution of a stochastic dynamic game for which there is a potential function. The players select a mean level of control. The state transition dynamics is a function of the current state of the system and a multiplicative noise factor on the control variables of the players. The particular application is for lake water usage. The control variables are the levels of phosphorus discharged (typically by farmers) into the watershed of the lake, and the random shock is the rainfall that washes the phosphorus into the lake. The state of the system is the accumulated level of phosphorus in the lake. The system dynamics are sufficiently nonlinear so that there can be two Nash equilibria. A Skiba-like point can be present in the optimal control solution.We analyze (numerically) how the dynamics and the Skiba-like point change as the variance of the noise (the rain) increases. The numerical analysis uses a result of Dechert (1978. Optimal control problems from second order difference equations. Journal of Economic Theory 19, 50–63) to construct a potential function for the dynamic game. This greatly reduces the computational burden in finding Nash equilibria solutions for the dynamic game.     

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.     

Contests with multiple alternative prizes: Public-good/bad prizes and externalities

We study contests in which there are multiple alternative public-good/bad prizes, and the players compete, by expending irreversible effort, over which prize to have awarded to them. Each prize may be a public good for some players and a public bad for the others, and the players expend their effort simultaneously and independently. We first prove the existence of a pure-strategy Nash equilibrium of the game, then establish when the total effort level expended for each prize is unique across the Nash equilibria, and then summarize and highlight other interesting and important properties of the equilibria. Finally, we discuss the effects of heterogeneity of valuations on the players’ equilibrium effort levels and a possible extension of the model.     

Sufficient conditions for Nash implementation

Given an objective for a group of three or more agents that satisfies monotonicity and no veto power, Maskin (1977) proposes a two-step procedure for constructing a game that implements the objective in Nash equilibrium. The first step specifies the strategy set of the game and three properties of the game rule that are together sufficient to insure Nash implementation of the objective. The second step is the explicit construction of a game that has these properties. An example is presented here that shows that the constructed game of the second step need not have one of the three properties of the first step, and it does in fact not Nash implement the objective in the example. The problem is attributable to restricted preferences. A solution proposed here is to appropriately expand the domain of definition of the objective. This insures that the constructed game has the properties of the game in Maskin's first step, and it therefore Nash implements the original objective.     

A mechanism implementing the proportional solution

We consider the problem of a commonly owned technology which transforms a single input into a single output. We are interested in implementing a social choice rule called theproportional solution. We introduce a mechanism which implements the proportional solution in Nash, strong (Nash) and undominated Nash equilibria. In the mechanism each agent announces only two numbers which can be interpreted as the total output and her share of the total input-output combination. This paper was originally titled "Doubly implementing the proportional solution." I would like to thank my advisor William Thomson for his detailed comments and suggestions. I would also like to thank Jeffrey Banks and Sung-Whee Shin for their comments. Two anonymous referees and an editor’s comments improved this paper substantially.     

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.     

Bargaining solutions with non-standard objectives

I examine the pure-strategy solutions of the sealed-bid bargaining game with incomplete information, when the buyer's and seller's objectives are other than the standard objective, namely maximization of expected profit. The motivation for this exploration lies in three problems of the standard formulation: the necessity of assuming common priors, the existence of uncountably many Nash equilibria, with no means for the players to coordinate on any one of them, and the uncertain relationship between these equilibria and observed behavior in bargaining experiments. Specifically, I consider two alternative objectives: minimization of maximum regret, and maximization of maximum profit. The solution concept here is not Nash equilibrium, but rather -individually rational strategy bundle. For that reason, I shall, where appropriate, use the word “solution” in place of “equilibrium.” Yet we find that the notion of Nash Equilibrium reappears, in a sense to be explained. In the minimax-regret case I find (in contrast to the case of expected profit) a unique solution; this solution reduces, for priors with coincident support, to the linear equilibrium of Chatterjee-Samuelson. In the maximum-profit case there are many solutions; they turn out to be slight generalizations of the one-step equilibria of Leininger-Linhart-Radner.     

Stable matchings and the small core in Nash equilibrium in the college admissions problem

Both rematching proof and strong equilibrium outcomes are stable with respect to the true preferences in the marriage problem. We show that not all rematching proof or strong equilibrium outcomes are stable in the college admissions problem. But we show that both rematching proof and strong equilibrium outcomes in truncations at the match point are all stable in the college admissions problem. Further, all true stable matchings can be achieved in both rematching proof and strong equilibrium in truncations at the match point. We show that any Nash equilibrium in truncations admits one and only one matching, stable or not. Therefore, the core at a Nash equilibrium in truncations must be small. But examples exist such that the set of stable matchings with respect to a Nash equilibrium may contain more than one matching. Nevertheless, each Nash equilibrium can only admit at most one true stable matching. If, indeed, there is a true stable matching at a Nash equilibrium, then the only possible equilibrium outcome will be the true stable matching, no matter how different are players' equilibrium strategies from the true preferences and how many other unstable matchings are there at that Nash equilibrium. Thus, we show that a necessary and sufficient condition for the stable matching rule to be implemented in a subset of Nash equilibria by the direct revelation game induced by a stable mechanism is that every Nash equilibrium profile in that subset admits one and only one true stable matching. Received: 30 December 1998 / Accepted: 12 October 2001 This paper is a revision of the paper “Manipulation and Stability in a College Admissions Problem” circulated since 1994. I thank Rich McLean, Abraham Neyman, Mark Satterthwaite, Sang-Chul Suh, and Tetsuji Yamada for helpful discussions. I thank the associate editor and the two anonymous referees for their helpful comments that have greatly improved the paper. I am grateful to the Kellogg G.S.M. at the Northwestern University for the hospitality for my visit. Any errors are mine.     

Large economies and two-player games

We characterize the core and the competitive allocations of a continuum economy as strong Nash equilibria of an associated game with only two players.     

Ambiguity in Electoral Competition

The paper proposes an explanation to why electoral competition induces parties to state ambiguous platforms even if voters dislike ambiguity. A platform is ambiguous if different voters may interpret it as different policy proposals. An ambiguous platform puts more or less emphasis on alternative policies so that it is more or less easily interpreted as one policy or the other. I suppose that a party can monitor exactly this platform design but cannot target its communications to individuals one by one. Each individual votes according to her understanding of the parties’ platforms but dislikes ambiguity. It is shown that this electoral competition has no Nash equilibrium. Nevertheless its max–min strategies are the optimal strategies of the Downsian game in mixed strategies. Furthermore, if parties behave prudently enough and if the voters aversion to ambiguity is small enough, these strategies do form an equilibrium.     

Endogenous institutions in bureaucratic compliance games

We consider a set-up where two governments have either conflicting or matching preferences on the provision of differentiated (local) goods supplied by a common monopoly bureau. We develop a two-stage game. At stage-1, the two governments decide whether or not to merge into a single institution. At stage-2, all players simultaneously and independently take their decisions in terms of production and rents, with perfect knowledge of the other players' strategies. We solve the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium of this game, and show that, if the bureau immediately updates its objective function to institutional changes, then the governments always prefer merging. However, if there is an initial bureaucratic inertia in adjusting the bureau's objective function to the institutional change, then ruling politicians may prefer decentralisation to centralisation, depending on the strategic properties of the compliance game and on their own discounting. Received: May 1999 / Accepted April 2000     

Integrating the Nash program into mechanism theory

Abstract. The present paper provides a method by which the Nash Program may be embedded into mechanism theory. It is shown that any result stating the support of any solution of a cooperative game in coalitional form by a Nash equilibrium of some suitable game in strategic form can be used to derive the mechanism theoretic Nash-implementation of that solution. Received: 29 June 1999 / Accepted: 3 April 2002     

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.