DOCSLIB.ORG

Super Altruistic Hedonic Games

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Super Altruistic Hedonic Games Super Altruistic Hedonic Games Jacob Schlueter and Judy Goldsmith University of Kentucky Lexington, Kentucky [email protected], [email protected] Abstract have its packets relayed. There are many other applications in which agents care not only about immediate connections, Hedonic games are coalition formation games in which but also those farther away. We introduce a family of hedonic agents’ utility depends only on their own coalition. The intro- games that model such broad evaluations of coalitions: the duction of Altruistic Hedonic Games increased the expressive potential of Hedonic Games by considering the utility of each Super Altruistic Hedonic Games. of the agent’s friends within the coalition. We introduce Su- per Altruistic Hedonic Games (SAHGs), in which an agent’s Related Work utility may depend on the utility of all other agents in the coalition, weighted according to their distance in the friend- SAHGs are a natural extension of Altruistic Hedonic Games ship graph. We establish the framework for this new model (AHGs) wherein agents consider the preferences of other and investigate the complexity of multiple notions of stabil- agents (Nguyen et al. 2016). In AHGs, agents only consider ity. We show that SAHGs generalize Friend-oriented Hedo- the preferences of their friends. In SAHGS, agents consider nic Games, Enemy-oriented Hedonic Games, and selfish-first the preferences of all agents in their coalition. In AHGs, Altruistic Hedonic Games, inheriting the hardness results of friends are assigned fixed weights. In SAHGs, the weights these games as minimum upper complexity bounds. We also assigned to friends and enemies are not fixed, and the prefer- give SAHGs that have neither Nash stable nor strictly core ences of all agents in a coalition are considered, often taking stable partitions. advantage of indirect relationships such as friends of friends to adjust weights. (Note that friendship is not transitive: a Introduction friend of a friend could be our enemy.) Social Distance Games (SDGs) are a class of coalition Consider the process of choosing where to live. Much has formation games wherein an agent’s utility is a measure of been written (in the RecSys literature, preferences, etc.) their closeness, or social distance, from the other members about how to choose the right house or apartment, even the of their coalition (Branzeiˆ and Larson 2011). SDGs have cer- right roommates for a stable configuration. Let us consider tain similarities to SAHGs, but we believe that SAHGs can the choice of neighbors, perhaps in a setting where students better model realistic human interactions by combining the are choosing their dormitories/hostels. We can see the par- notion of social distance with the consideration of others’ titioning of students into living units (floors, buildings, etc.) preferences proposed in AHGs. as an hedonic game. It is clear that we value our friends’ happiness with the living situation, as we will hear about it As we demonstrate later, SAHGs generalize Friends and from them; our enemies’ happiness could be assumed to also Enemies-oriented Hedonic Games (FHGs and EHGs) (Dim- affect how they treat us. (If we stopped there, we would be itrov et al. 2006). In the former, agents seek to find coalitions modeling evaluation as a Altruistic Hedonic Game.) More that maximize the number of friends with a secondary goal generally we can also argue that our friends’ friends’ hap- of minimizing the number of enemies. In the latter, mini- piness will affect our friends’, and thus indirectly, our own, mizing the number of enemies is the primary goal, while and that this continues out friendship chains, with decreasing maximizing the number of friends becomes secondary. Re- (or at least, non-increasing) effect as we increase the social cent work has investigated the impact that neutral agents distance from ourselves. have on these games, defining a neutral agent as one that If we were building intranets, a node could evaluate the is neither friend nor enemy (Ohta et al. 2017). It was shown quality of the local network in terms of the bandwidth to that permitting neutral agents in EHGs allows for games that reachable nodes. However, it would also need to take into have no core stable partition (Ohta et al. 2017). Core stable account the quality of more distant connections, if it hopes to partitions are still guaranteed to exist in FHGs with neutral agents; however, strict-core stable partitions are not (Ohta Copyright c 2020, Association for the Advancement of Artificial et al. 2017). The proofs of these findings cannot be read- Intelligence (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved. ily translated to SAHGs, because SAHGs do not allow neu- tral agents. Neutral agents could be modeled as graph-based Enemy-oriented Hedonic Games (EHGs) are based on games by labeling appropriate edges as neutral, but SAHGs the same principles as FHGs, but friends are instead as- are focused on simple graph-based models, so the addition signed a value of 1, while enemies are assigned a value of of neutral edges is beyond the scope of this paper. −n. There are graph-related hedonic games that depend on Altruistic hedonic games are another sub-category that edge-weighted graphs. For instance, B and W games are a expands on the ideas in FHGs and EHGs and is a major in- category of hedonic games in which an agent’s utility is de- spiration for the work done in this paper. fined by the agents in their coalition that they rate as the Definition 3. (Nguyen et al. 2016) An altruistic hedonic best or the worst, respectively (Cechlarov´ a´ and Romero- game (AHG) is a hedonic game in which agents derive util- Medina 2001). While these games fall into the category of ity from both their own basic preferences and those of any hedonic games, we don’t believe SAHGs can generalize B friends in the same coalition. or W games. Similarly, we do not believe that either B or Let each agent i 2 N have utility u , and let i parti- W games can generalize SAHGs. This is due to the differ- i tion other agents into friends and enemies, given by F ;E . ences between B and W games and SAHGS, such as the for- i i Three levels of altruism are considered in AHGs: selfish- mer two categories assuming each agent can assign a unique first, equal treatment, and altruistic first. The function used value to each other agent, while SAHGs restrict agents to to determine an agent’s utility depends on their altruism placing others into one of two categories. Additionally, B level and on pre-utility preference values calculated as the and W games do not consider the preferences of others as utility agents would have in a friends-oriented hedonic game SAHGs do. based on the same graph (njC \Fij−jC \Eij). Two of these functions utilize a weight parameter of M = n5 to ensure Preliminaries that one of the terms in the equation dominates the other. Below, we outline three types of cooperative games with This weight value is the smallest whole number exponent of non-transferable utility, specifically coalition formation n which guarantees this for both equations that make use of games. In each type, a game G consists of M. Definitions for each altruism level and their utility func- tions are outlined below: 1. N, a finite set of n agents, with 1. Selfish-First: agents prioritize their own preferences, but 2. preference set P = fPi : i 2 Ng, where Pi is the prefer- use the preferences of others to break ties. ence of each agent i over partitions of N into coalitions. u = M(njC \ F j − jC \ E j) Depending on the type of game, P may exhaustively list i i i each individual’s preferences or provide a succinct represen- X njC \ Faj − jC \ Eaj + tation from which preferences are derived. jC \ Fij a2C\Fi Definition 1. (Banerjee, Konishi, and Sonmez¨ 2001; Bogo- 2. Equal Treatment: all preferences are treated equally. molnaia and Jackson 2002) Hedonic games are coalition formation games with nontransferable utility wherein play- X njC \ Faj − jC \ Eaj ers are concerned only with their own coalition. This inher- ui = jC \ (Fi [ fig)j ently self-interested means of determining utility makes such a2C\(Fi[fig) games hedonic in nature. 3. Altruistic First: agents prioritize the preferences of oth- Let Ni be the set of possible coalitions containing agent ers, but use their own preferences to break ties. i 2 N. A preference ordering of Ni is derived from the pref- ui = njC \ Fij − jC \ Eij erence set Pi 2 P . A solution for a game is a partition π, which is contained in the set of all distinct partitions Γ. Each X njC \ Faj − jC \ Eaj player i 2 N ranks each partition π 2 Γ based on the coali- +M · jC \ Fij tion to which they belong. a2C\Fi We assume familiarity with the complexity classes P and Hedonic games are a broad category, so it can be use- NP, but also reference two lesser-known complexity classes, ful to define sub-categories that exhibit certain interesting or p DP and Θ . useful properties. Friend and enemy-oriented hedonic games 2 are two categories. Definition 4. (Papadimitriou and Yannakakis 1982) The complexity class DP contains languages defined as the dif- Definition 2. A Friend-oriented Hedonic Game (FHG) ference between two languages in NP. (Dimitrov et al. 2006) is characterized by agents assigned For example, let C be an NP-complete language, and let values to each other based on whether they view each other ∗ L = fhc1; c2i : c1 2 C ^ c2 2= Cg.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pareto Optimality in Coalition Formation
    Pareto Optimality in Coalition Formation Haris Aziz NICTA and University of New South Wales, 2033 Sydney, Australia Felix Brandt∗ Technische Universit¨atM¨unchen,80538 M¨unchen,Germany Paul Harrenstein University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3QD, United Kingdom Abstract A minimal requirement on allocative efficiency in the social sciences is Pareto op- timality. In this paper, we identify a close structural connection between Pareto optimality and perfection that has various algorithmic consequences for coali- tion formation. Based on this insight, we formulate the Preference Refinement Algorithm (PRA) which computes an individually rational and Pareto optimal outcome in hedonic coalition formation games. Our approach also leads to var- ious results for specific classes of hedonic games. In particular, we show that computing and verifying Pareto optimal partitions in general hedonic games, anonymous games, three-cyclic games, room-roommate games and B-hedonic games is intractable while both problems are tractable for roommate games, W-hedonic games, and house allocation with existing tenants. Keywords: Coalition Formation, Hedonic Games, Pareto Optimality, Computational Complexity JEL: C63, C70, C71, and C78 1. Introduction Ever since the publication of von Neumann and Morgenstern's Theory of Games and Economic Behavior in 1944, coalitions have played a central role within game theory. The crucial questions in coalitional game theory are which coalitions can be expected to form and how the members of coalitions should divide the proceeds of their cooperation. Traditionally the focus has been on the latter issue, which led to the formulation and analysis of concepts such as ∗Corresponding author Email addresses: [email protected] (Haris Aziz), [email protected] (Felix Brandt), [email protected] (Paul Harrenstein) Preprint submitted to Elsevier August 27, 2013 the core, the Shapley value, or the bargaining set.
    [Show full text]
  • Pareto-Optimality in Cardinal Hedonic Games
    Research Paper AAMAS 2020, May 9–13, Auckland, New Zealand Pareto-Optimality in Cardinal Hedonic Games Martin Bullinger Technische Universität München München, Germany [email protected] ABSTRACT number of agents, and therefore it is desirable to consider expres- Pareto-optimality and individual rationality are among the most nat- sive, but succinctly representable classes of hedonic games. This ural requirements in coalition formation. We study classes of hedo- can be established by encoding preferences by means of a complete nic games with cardinal utilities that can be succinctly represented directed weighted graph where an edge weight EG ¹~º is a cardinal by means of complete weighted graphs, namely additively separable value or utility that agent G assigns to agent ~. Still, this underlying (ASHG), fractional (FHG), and modified fractional (MFHG) hedo- structure leaves significant freedom, how to obtain (cardinal) pref- nic games. Each of these can model different aspects of dividing a erences over coalitions. An especially appealing type of preferences society into groups. For all classes of games, we give algorithms is to have the sum of values of the other individuals as the value that find Pareto-optimal partitions under some natural restrictions. of a coalition. This constitutes the important class of additively While the output is also individually rational for modified fractional separable hedonic games (ASHGs) [6]. hedonic games, combining both notions is NP-hard for symmetric In ASHGs, an agent is willing to accept an additional agent into ASHGs and FHGs. In addition, we prove that welfare-optimal and her coalition as long as her valuation of this agent is non-negative Pareto-optimal partitions coincide for simple, symmetric MFHGs, and in this sense, ASHGs are not sensitive to the intensities of single- solving an open problem from Elkind et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Optimizing Expected Utility and Stability in Role Based Hedonic Games
    Proceedings of the Thirtieth International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference Optimizing Expected Utility and Stability in Role Based Hedonic Games Matthew Spradling University of Michigan - Flint mjspra@umflint.edu Abstract Table 1: Ex. RBHG instance with |P | =4,R= {A, B} In the hedonic coalition formation game model Roles Based r, c u (r, c) u (r, c) u (r, c) u (r, c) Hedonic Games (RBHG), agents view teams as compositions p0 p1 p2 p3 of available roles. An agent’s utility for a partition is based A, AA 2200 upon which roles she and her teammates fulfill within the A, AB 0322 coalition. I show positive results for finding optimal or sta- B,AB 3033 ble role matchings given a partitioning into teams. In set- B,BB 1111 tings such as massively multiplayer online games, a central authority assigns agents to teams but not necessarily to roles within them. For such settings, I consider the problems of op- timizing expected utility and expected stability in RBHG. I As per (Spradling and Goldsmith 2015), a Role Based He- show that the related optimization problems for partitioning donic Game (RBHG) instance consists of: are NP-hard. I introduce a local search heuristic method for • P approximating such solutions. I validate the heuristic by com- : A population of players parison to existing partitioning approaches using real-world • R: A set of roles data scraped from League of Legends games. • C: A set of compositions, where a composition c ∈ C is a multiset (bag) of roles from R. Introduction • U : P × R × C → Z defines the utility function ui(r, c) In coalition formation games, agents from a population have for each player pi.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dynamics of Europe's Political Economy
    Die approbierte Originalversion dieser Dissertation ist in der Hauptbibliothek der Technischen Universität Wien aufgestellt und zugänglich. http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at The approved original version of this thesis is available at the main library of the Vienna University of Technology. http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at/eng DISSERTATION The Dynamics of Europe’s Political Economy: a game theoretical analysis Ausgeführt zum Zwecke der Erlangung des akademischen Grades einer Doktorin der Sozial- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften unter der Leitung von Univ.-Prof. Dr. Hardy Hanappi Institut für Stochastik und Wirtschaftsmathematik (E105) Forschunggruppe Ökonomie Univ.-Prof. Dr. Pasquale Tridico Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Universität Roma Tre eingereicht an der Technischen Universität Wien Fakultät für Mathematik und Geoinformation von Mag. Gizem Yildirim Matrikelnummer: 0527237 Hohlweggasse 10/10, 1030 Wien Wien am Mai 2017 Acknowledgements I would like to thank Professor Hardy Hanappi for his guidance, motivation and patience. I am grateful for inspirations from many conversations we had. He was always very generous with his time and I had a great freedom in my research. I also would like to thank Professor Pasquale Tridico for his interest in my work and valuable feedbacks. The support from my family and friends are immeasurable. I thank my parents and my brother for their unconditional and unending love and support. I am incredibly lucky to have great friends. I owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to Sarah Dippenaar, Katharina Schigutt and Markus Wallerberger for their support during my thesis but more importantly for sharing good and bad times. I also would like to thank Gregor Kasieczka for introducing me to jet clustering algorithms and his valuable suggestions.
    [Show full text]
  • Fractional Hedonic Games
    Fractional Hedonic Games HARIS AZIZ, Data61, CSIRO and UNSW Australia FLORIAN BRANDL, Technical University of Munich FELIX BRANDT, Technical University of Munich PAUL HARRENSTEIN, University of Oxford MARTIN OLSEN, Aarhus University DOMINIK PETERS, University of Oxford The work we present in this paper initiated the formal study of fractional hedonic games, coalition formation games in which the utility of a player is the average value he ascribes to the members of his coalition. Among other settings, this covers situations in which players only distinguish between friends and non-friends and desire to be in a coalition in which the fraction of friends is maximal. Fractional hedonic games thus not only constitute a natural class of succinctly representable coalition formation games, but also provide an interesting framework for network clustering. We propose a number of conditions under which the core of fractional hedonic games is non-empty and provide algorithms for computing a core stable outcome. By contrast, we show that the core may be empty in other cases, and that it is computationally hard in general to decide non-emptiness of the core. 1 INTRODUCTION Hedonic games present a natural and versatile framework to study the formal aspects of coalition formation which has received much attention from both an economic and an algorithmic perspective. This work was initiated by Drèze and Greenberg[1980], Banerjee et al . [2001], Cechlárová and Romero-Medina[2001], and Bogomolnaia and Jackson[2002] and has sparked a lot of follow- up work. A recent survey was provided by Aziz and Savani[2016]. In hedonic games, coalition formation is approached from a game-theoretic angle.
    [Show full text]
  • Pareto Optimality in Coalition Formation
    Pareto Optimality in Coalition Formation Haris Aziz Felix Brandt Paul Harrenstein Technische Universität München IJCAI Workshop on Social Choice and Artificial Intelligence, July 16, 2011 1 / 21 Coalition formation “Coalition formation is of fundamental importance in a wide variety of social, economic, and political problems, ranging from communication and trade to legislative voting. As such, there is much about the formation of coalitions that deserves study.” A. Bogomolnaia and M. O. Jackson. The stability of hedonic coalition structures. Games and Economic Behavior. 2002. 2 / 21 Coalition formation 3 / 21 Hedonic Games A hedonic game is a pair (N; ) where N is a set of players and = (1;:::; jNj) is a preference profile which specifies for each player i 2 N his preference over coalitions he is a member of. For each player i 2 N, i is reflexive, complete and transitive. A partition π is a partition of players N into disjoint coalitions. A player’s appreciation of a coalition structure (partition) only depends on the coalition he is a member of and not on how the remaining players are grouped. 4 / 21 Classes of Hedonic Games Unacceptable coalition: player would rather be alone. General hedonic games: preference of each player over acceptable coalitions 1: f1; 2; 3g ; f1; 2g ; f1; 3gjf 1gk 2: f1; 2gjf 1; 2; 3g ; f1; 3g ; f2gk 3: f2; 3gjf 3gkf 1; 2; 3g ; f1; 3g Partition ff1g; f2; 3gg 5 / 21 Classes of Hedonic Games General hedonic games: preference of each player over acceptable coalitions Preferences over players extend to preferences over coalitions Roommate games: only coalitions of size 1 and 2 are acceptable.
    [Show full text]
  • 15 Hedonic Games Haris Azizaand Rahul Savanib
    Draft { December 5, 2014 15 Hedonic Games Haris Azizaand Rahul Savanib 15.1 Introduction Coalitions are a central part of economic, political, and social life, and coalition formation has been studied extensively within the mathematical social sciences. Agents (be they humans, robots, or software agents) have preferences over coalitions and, based on these preferences, it is natural to ask which coalitions are expected to form, and which coalition structures are better social outcomes. In this chapter, we consider coalition formation games with hedonic preferences, or simply hedonic games. The outcome of a coalition formation game is a partitioning of the agents into disjoint coalitions, which we will refer to synonymously as a partition or coalition structure. The defining feature of hedonic preferences is that every agent only cares about which agents are in its coalition, but does not care how agents in other coali- tions are grouped together (Dr`ezeand Greenberg, 1980). Thus, hedonic preferences completely ignore inter-coalitional dependencies. Despite their relative simplicity, hedonic games have been used to model many interesting settings, such as research team formation (Alcalde and Revilla, 2004), scheduling group activities (Darmann et al., 2012), formation of coalition governments (Le Breton et al., 2008), cluster- ings in social networks (see e.g., Aziz et al., 2014b; McSweeney et al., 2014; Olsen, 2009), and distributed task allocation for wireless agents (Saad et al., 2011). Before we give a formal definition of a hedonic game, we give a standard hedonic game from the literature that we will use as a running example (see e.g., Banerjee et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Issues of Fairness and Computation in Partition Problems
    Fair and Square: Issues of Fairness and Computation in Partition Problems Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf vorgelegt von Nhan-Tam Nguyen aus Hilden Düsseldorf, Juli 2017 aus dem Institut für Informatik der Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf Gedruckt mit der Genehmigung der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf Referent: Prof. Dr. Jörg Rothe Koreferent: Prof. Dr. Edith Elkind Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 20.12.2017 Selbstständigkeitserklärung Ich versichere an Eides Statt, dass die Dissertation von mir selbstständig und ohne unzulässige fremde Hilfe unter Beachtung der „Grundsätze zur Sicherung guter wissenschaftlicher Praxis an der Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf“ erstellt worden ist. Desweiteren erkläre ich, dass ich eine Dissertation in der vorliegenden oder in ähnlicher Form noch bei keiner anderen Institution eingereicht habe. Teile dieser Arbeit wurden bereits in den folgenden Schriften veröffentlicht oder zur Begutach- tung eingereicht: Baumeister et al. [2014], Baumeister et al. [2017], Nguyen et al. [2015], Nguyen et al. [2018], Heinen et al. [2015], Nguyen and Rothe [2016], Nguyen et al. [2016]. Düsseldorf, 7. Juli 2017 Nhan-Tam Nguyen Acknowledgments First and foremost, I owe a debt of gratitude to Jörg Rothe, my advisor, for his positive en- couragement, understanding, patience, and for asking the right questions. I’m grateful for his guidance through the academic world. Dorothea Baumeister deserves much thanks for being my mentor and her thorough feedback. I’d like to thank Edith Elkind for agreeing to review my thesis and be part of my defense and examination, as well as for sharing the durian at AAMAS 2016 in Singapore.
    [Show full text]
  • Pareto-Optimality in Cardinal Hedonic Games
    Pareto-Optimality in Cardinal Hedonic Games Martin Bullinger Technische Universität München München, Germany [email protected] ABSTRACT number of agents, and therefore it is desirable to consider expres- Pareto-optimality and individual rationality are among the most nat- sive, but succinctly representable classes of hedonic games. This ural requirements in coalition formation. We study classes of hedo- can be established by encoding preferences by means of a complete nic games with cardinal utilities that can be succinctly represented directed weighted graph where an edge weight EG ¹~º is a cardinal by means of complete weighted graphs, namely additively separable value or utility that agent G assigns to agent ~. Still, this underlying (ASHG), fractional (FHG), and modified fractional (MFHG) hedo- structure leaves significant freedom, how to obtain (cardinal) pref- nic games. Each of these can model different aspects of dividing a erences over coalitions. An especially appealing type of preferences society into groups. For all classes of games, we give algorithms is to have the sum of values of the other individuals as the value that find Pareto-optimal partitions under some natural restrictions. of a coalition. This constitutes the important class of additively While the output is also individually rational for modified fractional separable hedonic games (ASHGs) [6]. hedonic games, combining both notions is NP-hard for symmetric In ASHGs, an agent is willing to accept an additional agent into ASHGs and FHGs. In addition, we prove that welfare-optimal and her coalition as long as her valuation of this agent is non-negative Pareto-optimal partitions coincide for simple, symmetric MFHGs, and in this sense, ASHGs are not sensitive to the intensities of single- solving an open problem from Elkind et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Graphical Hedonic Games of Bounded Treewidth
    Proceedings of the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-16) Graphical Hedonic Games of Bounded Treewidth Dominik Peters Department of Computer Science University of Oxford, UK [email protected] p Abstract NP-hard to maximise social welfare; and it is often even Σ2- complete to identify hedonic games with non-empty core. Hedonic games are a well-studied model of coalition See Ballester (2004), Sung and Dimitrov (2010), Woeginger formation, in which selfish agents are partitioned into (2013), and Peters and Elkind (2015) for a selection of such disjoint sets and agents care about the make-up of the coalition they end up in. The computational problems results. of finding stable, optimal, or fair outcomes tend to be A standard criticism of hardness results such as these is that computationally intractable in even severely restricted they apply only in the worst case. Instances arising in practice instances of hedonic games. We introduce the notion of can be expected to show much more structure than the highly a graphical hedonic game and show that, in contrast, on contrived instances produced in 3SAT-reductions. In non- classes of graphical hedonic games whose underlying cooperative game theory, graphical games (Kearns, Littman, graphs are of bounded treewidth and degree, such prob- and Singh 2001) are an influential way to allow formalisation lems become easy. In particular, problems that can be of the notion of a ‘structured’ game. In a graphical game, specified through quantification over agents, coalitions, and (connected) partitions can be decided in linear time. agents form the vertices of an undirected graph, and each The proof is by reduction to monadic second order logic.
    [Show full text]
  • Hedonic Diversity Games
    Session 2E: Game Theory 1 AAMAS 2019, May 13-17, 2019, Montréal, Canada Hedonic Diversity Games Robert Bredereck Edith Elkind Ayumi Igarashi TU Berlin University of Oxford Kyushu University Berlin, Germany Oxford, U.K. Fukuoka, Japan [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT homophilic preferences, while others have heterophilic preferences, We consider a coalition formation setting where each agent belongs i.e., they seek out coalitions with agents who are not like them. to one of the two types, and agents’ preferences over coalitions There is a very substantial body of research on homophily and are determined by the fraction of the agents of their own type in heterophily in group formation. It is well-known that in a variety of each coalition. This setting differs from the well-studied Schelling’s contexts, ranging from residential location [25, 28, 29] to classroom model in that some agents may prefer homogeneous coalitions, activities and friendship relations [22, 23], individuals prefer to while others may prefer to be members of a diverse group, or a be together with those who are similar to them. There are also group that mostly consists of agents of the other type. We model settings where agents prefer to be in a group with agents of the this setting as a hedonic game and investigate the existence of stable other type(s): for instance, in a coalition of buyers and sellers, a outcomes using hedonic games solution concepts. We show that a buyer prefers to be in a group with many other sellers and no core stable outcome may fail to exist and checking the existence of other buyers, so as to maximize their negotiating power.
    [Show full text]
  • Facultad De Economía Y Empresa Dpto. Análisis Económico Three
    Facultad de Economía y Empresa Dpto. Análisis Económico Three Essays on Game Theory and Social Choice Oihane Gallo1 2 Ph.D Thesis Advisors: Elena Inarra and Jorge Alcalde-Unzu Bilbao, 2020 1Dpto. Análisis Económico, Facultad de Economía y Empresa, Universidad del País Vasco (UPV/EHU), Av. Lehendakari Aguirre 83, 48015 Bilbao (SPAIN), , email: oi- [email protected], personal page: https://sites.google.com/site/oihanegallofernandez/. 2This research was supported by the Basque Government through scholarship PRE_2019_2_0116. (c)2020 OIHANE GALLO FERNANDEZ Acknowledgements After five years of hard work it is time to look back and realize how many people have supported me, not only when there were successes, but also when forces fal- tered. This adventure was not in my plans when I started my Master’s degree and if it had not been for one of my advisors, Elena Iñarra of the University of the Basque Country, I would never have embarked on it. I would like to thank Elena for choos- ing me, guiding me, and supporting me through this long process. The development of this dissertation would not have been possible without her patience and the time she has devoted to me. It was in my first workshop, in Vigo, where I met a person who would play a rele- vant role in my thesis. He is my advisor Jorge Alcalde-Unzu of the Public University of Navarre. He introduced me to a new field and even though the process has not been easy, he has always encouraged me to improve my reasoning and resolution skills.
    [Show full text]