Dynamic Coalitional Agreements - coalitional rationalizability in multi-stage games

نویسنده

  • Attila Ambrus
چکیده

This paper extends the concept of coalitional rationalizability of Ambrus(01) to incorporate sequential rationality in multi-stage games with observable actions and incomplete information. Agreements among players are implicit, it is assumed that players cannot communicate with each other during the game. They re°ect a reasoning procedure which entails restricting strategies in a mutually advantegous way. They can be conditional on observed histories and players' types, which corresponds to allowing players to make agreements ex post and along the course of play. An agreement that is conditioned on a history is evaluated from the point of view of that history. This introduces a dynamic interaction among coalitional agreements with features of both backward and forward induction. Coalitional agreements iteratively de ̄ne the set of extensive form coalitionally rationalizable strategies. This solution concept has a number of analogous properties with normal form coalitionally rationalizability. It is always nonempty. The set of outcomes consistent with it is a subset of the outcomes consistent with extensive form rationalizability, and it is robust to the order in which agreements are made. In games of perfect information extensive form coalitional rationalizability is outcome equivalent to extensive form rationalizability. Perfect coalition-proof Nash equilibria and renegotiation-proof Nash equilibria do not have to be contained in the solution set, even in two-player games, because those concepts do not imply forward induction reasoning. An alternative notion of extensive form coalitional rationalizability is also provided, assuming that coalitional agreements can only be made ex ante, but sequential individual rationality is maintained. * Princeton University and Yale University. I thank Stephen Morris, David Pearce and especially Dilip Abreu for useful comments and suggestions. I also bene ̄tted from conversations on the topic with Faruk Gul, Wolfgang Pesendorfer and Marciano Siniscalchi. I am grateful to the Cowles Foundation for the fellowship they granted me when I was working on this paper.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Theories of coalitional rationality

This paper generalizes the concept of best response to coalitions of players and offers epistemic definitions of coalitional rationalizability in normal form games. The (best) response of a coalition is defined to be an operator from sets of conjectures to sets of strategies. A strategy is epistemic coalitionally rationalizable if it is consistent with rationality and common certainty that ever...

متن کامل

Coalitional Public Announcement Games

Dynamic epistemic logic (DEL) is a popular framework for studying interaction in multi-agent systems. DELs describe the actions available to the agents, and their epistemic preand post-conditions. By extending standard epistemic models with preferences over epistemic states, we can say something about rational behaviour as well, combining logic and game theory. In this paper we assume that pref...

متن کامل

Core Membership Computation for Succinct Representations of Coalitional Games

In this paper, I compare and contrast two formal results on the computational complexity of core membership determination in two compact representations of coalitional games. Conitzer and Sandholm [1] proposed the multi-issue representations of coalitional games. This representation attempts to decompose a coalitional games into a set of sub-games. Later, Ieong and Shoham [3] proposed the margi...

متن کامل

Bayesian coalitional rationalizability

We extend Ambrus’s [QJE, 2006] concept of “coalitional rationalizability (c-rationalizability)” to situations where, in seeking mutual beneficial interests, players in groups (i) make use of Bayes rule in expectation calculations and (ii) contemplate various deviations — i.e. the validity of deviation is checked against any arbitrary sets of strategies, not only against restricted subsets of st...

متن کامل

On the computational complexity of qualitative coalitional games

We study coalitional games in which agents are each assumed to have a goal to be achieved, and where the characteristic property of a coalition is a set of choices, with each choice denoting a set of goals that would be achieved if the choice was made. Such qualitative coalitional games (QCGs) are a natural tool for modelling goal-oriented multiagent systems. After introducing and formally defi...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2003