From observable behaviors to structures of interaction in binary games of strategic complements (Q280676): Difference between revisions
From MaRDI portal
Created a new Item |
Changed an Item |
||
Property / review text | |||
Summary: Consider a setting in which agents can take one of two ordered actions and in which the incentive to take the high action increases in the number of other agents taking it. Furthermore, assume that we do not know anything else about the game being played. What can we say about the details of the interaction between actions and incentives when we observe a set or a subset of all possible equilibria? In this paper, we study this question by exploring three nested classes of games: (a) binary games of strategic complements; (b) games in (a) that admit a network representation; and (c) games in (b) in which the network is complete. Our main results are the following: It has long been established in the literature that the set of pure strategy Nash equilibria of any binary game of strategic complements among a set, \(N\), of agents can be seen as a lattice on the set of all subsets of \(N\) under the partial order defined by the set inclusion relation \((\subseteq)\). If the game happens to be strict in the sense that agents are never indifferent among outcomes (games in (a)), then the resulting lattice of equilibria satisfies a straightforward sparseness condition. (1) We show that, in fact, for each such lattice, \(\mathcal L\), there is a game in (a), such that its set of equilibria is \(\mathcal L\) (we say that such a game expresses \(\mathcal L\)); (2) We show that there exists a game in (b), whose set of equilibria contains a given collection, \(\mathcal C\), of subsets of \(N\), if and only \(\mathcal C\) satisfies the sparseness condition, and the smallest game in (a) expressing \(\mathcal C\) is trade robust; (3) We show that there exists a game on the complete graph (games in (c)), whose set of equilibria coincides with some collection, \(\mathcal C\), if and only if \(\mathcal C\) is a chain satisfying the sparseness condition. | |||
Property / review text: Summary: Consider a setting in which agents can take one of two ordered actions and in which the incentive to take the high action increases in the number of other agents taking it. Furthermore, assume that we do not know anything else about the game being played. What can we say about the details of the interaction between actions and incentives when we observe a set or a subset of all possible equilibria? In this paper, we study this question by exploring three nested classes of games: (a) binary games of strategic complements; (b) games in (a) that admit a network representation; and (c) games in (b) in which the network is complete. Our main results are the following: It has long been established in the literature that the set of pure strategy Nash equilibria of any binary game of strategic complements among a set, \(N\), of agents can be seen as a lattice on the set of all subsets of \(N\) under the partial order defined by the set inclusion relation \((\subseteq)\). If the game happens to be strict in the sense that agents are never indifferent among outcomes (games in (a)), then the resulting lattice of equilibria satisfies a straightforward sparseness condition. (1) We show that, in fact, for each such lattice, \(\mathcal L\), there is a game in (a), such that its set of equilibria is \(\mathcal L\) (we say that such a game expresses \(\mathcal L\)); (2) We show that there exists a game in (b), whose set of equilibria contains a given collection, \(\mathcal C\), of subsets of \(N\), if and only \(\mathcal C\) satisfies the sparseness condition, and the smallest game in (a) expressing \(\mathcal C\) is trade robust; (3) We show that there exists a game on the complete graph (games in (c)), whose set of equilibria coincides with some collection, \(\mathcal C\), if and only if \(\mathcal C\) is a chain satisfying the sparseness condition. / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
Property / Mathematics Subject Classification ID | |||
Property / Mathematics Subject Classification ID: 91D30 / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
Property / Mathematics Subject Classification ID | |||
Property / Mathematics Subject Classification ID: 91A43 / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
Property / Mathematics Subject Classification ID | |||
Property / Mathematics Subject Classification ID: 05C57 / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
Property / zbMATH DE Number | |||
Property / zbMATH DE Number: 6578399 / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
Property / zbMATH Keywords | |||
peer effects | |||
Property / zbMATH Keywords: peer effects / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
Property / zbMATH Keywords | |||
social networks | |||
Property / zbMATH Keywords: social networks / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
Property / zbMATH Keywords | |||
strategic complements | |||
Property / zbMATH Keywords: strategic complements / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
Property / zbMATH Keywords | |||
simple games | |||
Property / zbMATH Keywords: simple games / rank | |||
Normal rank | |||
Property / zbMATH Keywords | |||
weighted games | |||
Property / zbMATH Keywords: weighted games / rank | |||
Normal rank |
Revision as of 17:29, 27 June 2023
scientific article
Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
---|---|---|---|
English | From observable behaviors to structures of interaction in binary games of strategic complements |
scientific article |
Statements
From observable behaviors to structures of interaction in binary games of strategic complements (English)
0 references
10 May 2016
0 references
Summary: Consider a setting in which agents can take one of two ordered actions and in which the incentive to take the high action increases in the number of other agents taking it. Furthermore, assume that we do not know anything else about the game being played. What can we say about the details of the interaction between actions and incentives when we observe a set or a subset of all possible equilibria? In this paper, we study this question by exploring three nested classes of games: (a) binary games of strategic complements; (b) games in (a) that admit a network representation; and (c) games in (b) in which the network is complete. Our main results are the following: It has long been established in the literature that the set of pure strategy Nash equilibria of any binary game of strategic complements among a set, \(N\), of agents can be seen as a lattice on the set of all subsets of \(N\) under the partial order defined by the set inclusion relation \((\subseteq)\). If the game happens to be strict in the sense that agents are never indifferent among outcomes (games in (a)), then the resulting lattice of equilibria satisfies a straightforward sparseness condition. (1) We show that, in fact, for each such lattice, \(\mathcal L\), there is a game in (a), such that its set of equilibria is \(\mathcal L\) (we say that such a game expresses \(\mathcal L\)); (2) We show that there exists a game in (b), whose set of equilibria contains a given collection, \(\mathcal C\), of subsets of \(N\), if and only \(\mathcal C\) satisfies the sparseness condition, and the smallest game in (a) expressing \(\mathcal C\) is trade robust; (3) We show that there exists a game on the complete graph (games in (c)), whose set of equilibria coincides with some collection, \(\mathcal C\), if and only if \(\mathcal C\) is a chain satisfying the sparseness condition.
0 references
peer effects
0 references
social networks
0 references
strategic complements
0 references
simple games
0 references
weighted games
0 references