Monotone bargaining is Nash-solvable
Given two finite ordered sets A and B, let O=A×B denote the set of outcomes of the following game: Two players, Alice and Bob, have the sets of strategies X and Y that consist of all monotone non-decreasing mappings x:A→B and y:B→A, respectively. It is easily seen that each pair (x,y)∈X×Y produces at least one deal, that is, an outcome (a,b)∈O such that x(a)=b and y(b)=a. Denote by G(x,y)⊆O the set of all such deals related to (x,y). The obtained mapping G:X×Y→2O is a game correspondence. Choose an arbitrary deal g(x,y)∈G(x,y) to obtain a mapping g:X×Y→O, which is a game form. We show that each such game form is tight and, hence, Nash-solvable, that is, for any pair u=(uA,uB) of utility functions of Alice and Bob, the obtained monotone bargaining game (g,u) has at least one Nash equilibrium (x,y) in pure strategies. Moreover, |G(x,y)|=1 and, hence, (x,y) is a Nash equilibrium in game (g,u) for all g∈G. We also obtain an efficient algorithm that determines such an equilibrium in time quadratic in |O|, although the numbers of strategies are exponential in |O|. Our results show that, somewhat surprisingly, the players have no need to hide or randomize their bargaining strategies, even in the zero-sum case.
In this paper we consider games with preference relations. The cooperative aspect of a game is connected with its coalitions. The main optimality concepts for such games are concepts of equilibrium and acceptance. We introduce a notion of coalition homomorphism for cooperative games with preference relations and study a problem concerning connections between equilibrium points (acceptable outcomes) of games which are in a homomorphic relation. The main results of our work are connected with finding of covariant and contravariant homomorphisms.
In this paper, we consider the following problem - what affects the amount of investment in knowledge when one of the network firms enters another innovation network. The solution of this problem will allow us to understand exactly how innovative companies will behave when deciding whether to enter the innovation network of another country or region, what conditions affect it and how the level of future investments in knowledge can be predicted.
The paper proposes a list of requirements for a game able to describe individually motivated social interactions: be non-cooperative, able to construct multiple coalitions in an equilibrium and incorporate intra and inter coalition externalities. For this purpose the paper presents a family of non-cooperative games for coalition structure construction with an equilibrium existence theorem for a game in the family. Few examples illustrate the approach. One of the results is that efficiency is not equivalent to cooperation as an allocation in one coalition. Further papers will demonstrate other applications of the approach.
In this paper we consider games with preference relations. The main optimality concept for such games is concept of equilibrium. We introduce a notion of homomorphism for games with preference relations and study a problem concerning connections between equilibrium points of games which are in a homomorphic relation. The main result is finding covariantly and contravariantly complete families of homomorphisms.
The ninth issue of annual Collection of articles consists of four sections: “Analysis of actual economic processes”, “Modeling of financial and market mechanisms”, “Dynamic models”, “Discussions, Notes and Letters”. As a whole nine articles are presented
In this paper, we consider the following problem - what affects the Nash equilibrium amount of investment in knowledge when some agents of the complete graph enter another full one. The solution of this problem will allow us to understand exactly how game agents will behave when deciding whether to enter the other net, what conditions and externalities affect it and how the level of future equilibrium amount of investments in knowledge can be predicted.
In Russia, chain stores have achieved considerable market power. In this work, we combine a Dixit–Stiglitz industry model with a monopolistic retailer in order to address the following questions: does the retailer always impair prices, variety of goods, and ultimately welfare? Which market structure is worse: Nash or Stackelberg? What should be the public policy in this area?
For n person games with preference relations some types of optimality solutions are introduced. Elementary properties of their solutions are considered. One sufficient condition for nonempty Ca-core is found.