Selfishness Level of Strategic Games

We introduce a new measure of the discrepancy in strategic games between the social welfare in a Nash equilibrium and in a social optimum, that we call selfishness level. It is the smallest fraction of the social welfare that needs to be offered to each player to achieve that a social optimum is realized in a pure Nash equilibrium. The selfishness level is unrelated to the price of stability and the price of anarchy and is invariant under positive linear transformations of the payoff functions. Also, it naturally applies to other solution concepts and other forms of games. We study the selfishness level of several well-known strategic games. This allows us to quantify the implicit tension within a game between players' individual interests and the impact of their decisions on the society as a whole. Our analyses reveal that the selfishness level often provides a deeper understanding of the characteristics of the underlying game that influence the players' willingness to cooperate. In particular, the selfishness level of finite ordinal potential games is finite, while that of weakly acyclic games can be infinite. We derive explicit bounds on the selfishness level of fair cost sharing games and linear congestion games, which depend on specific parameters of the underlying game but are independent of the number of players. Further, we show that the selfishness level of the $n$-players Prisoner's Dilemma is $c/(b(n-1)-c)$, where $b$ and $c$ are the benefit and cost for cooperation, respectively, that of the $n$-players public goods game is $(1-\frac{c}{n})/(c-1)$, where $c$ is the public good multiplier, and that of the Traveler's Dilemma game is $\frac{1}{2}(b-1)$, where $b$ is the bonus. Finally, the selfishness level of Cournot competition (an example of an infinite ordinal potential game, Tragedy of the Commons, and Bertrand competition is infinite.Comment: 34 page

Entanglement and Dynamic Stability of Nash Equilibria in a Symmetric Quantum Game

We study the evolutionary stability of Nash equilibria (NE) in a symmetric quantum game played by the recently proposed scheme of applying `identity' and `Pauli spin flip' operators on the initial state with classical probabilities. We show that in this symmetric game dynamic stability of a NE can be changed when the game changes its form, for example, from classical to quantum. It happens even when the NE remains intact in both forms.Comment: Latex,no figure,submitted to Physics Letters

Sufficient conditions for stable equilibria

A refinement of the set of Nash equilibria that satisfies two assumptions is shown to select a subset that is stable in the sense defined by Kohlberg and Mertens. One assumption requires that a selected set is invariant to adjoining redundant strategies and the other is a strong version of backward induction. Backward induction is interpreted as the requirement that each player's strategy is sequentially rational and conditionally admissible at every information set in an extensive-form game with perfect recall, implemented here by requiring that the equilibrium is quasi-perfect. The strong version requires 'truly' quasi-perfection in that each strategy perturbation refines the selection to a quasi-perfect equilibrium in the set. An exact characterization of stable sets is provided for two-player games.Game theory, equilibrium selection, stability

Evolutionary stability in quantum games

In evolutionary game theory an Evolutionarily Stable Strategy (ESS) is a refinement of the Nash equilibrium concept that is sometimes also recognized as evolutionary stability. It is a game-theoretic model, well known to mathematical biologists, that was found quite useful in the understanding of evolutionary dynamics of a population. This chapter presents an analysis of evolutionary stability in the emerging field of quantum games.Comment: 38 pages, 2 figures, contributed chapter to the book "Quantum Aspects of Life" edited by D. Abbott, P. Davies and A. Pat

Coalition Formation in Political Games

We study the formation of a ruling coalition in political environments. Each individual is endowed with a level of political power. The ruling coalition consists of a subset of the individuals in the society and decides the distribution of resources. A ruling coalition needs to contain enough powerful members to win against any alternative coalition that may challenge it, and it needs to be self-enforcing, in the sense that none of its sub-coalitions should be able to secede and become the new ruling coalition. We first present an axiomatic approach that captures these notions and determines a (generically) unique ruling coalition. We then construct a simple dynamic game that encompasses these ideas and prove that the sequentially weakly dominant equilibria (and the Markovian trembling hand perfect equilibria) of this game coincide with the set of ruling coalitions of the axiomatic approach. We also show the equivalence of these notions to the core of a related non-transferable utility cooperative game. In all cases, the nature of the ruling coalition is determined by the power constraint, which requires that the ruling coalition be powerful enough, and by the enforcement constraint, which imposes that no sub-coalition of the ruling coalition that commands a majority is self-enforcing. The key insight that emerges from this characterization is that the coalition is made self-enforcing precisely by the failure of its winning sub-coalitions to be self-enforcing. This is most simply illustrated by the following simple finding: with a simple majority rule, while three-person (or larger) coalitions can be self-enforcing, two-person coalitions are generically not self-enforcing. Therefore, the reasoning in this paper suggests that three-person juntas or councils should be more common than two-person ones. In addition, we provide conditions under which the grand coalition will be the ruling coalition and conditions under which the most powerful individuals will not be included in the ruling coalition. We also use this framework to discuss endogenous party formation.

Coalition Formation in Political Games

We study the formation of a ruling coalition in political environments. Each individual is endowed with a level of political power. The ruling coalition consists of a subset of the individuals in the society and decides the distribution of resources. A ruling coalition needs to contain enough powerful members to win against any alternative coalition that may challenge it, and it needs to be self-enforcing, in the sense that none of its subcoalitions should be able to secede and become the new ruling coalition. We first present an axiomatic approach that captures these notions and determines a (generically) unique ruling coalition. We then construct a simple dynamic game that encompasses these ideas and prove that the sequentially weakly dominant equilibria (and the Markovian trembling hand perfect equilibria) of this game coincide with the set of ruling coalitions of the axiomatic approach. We also show the equivalence of these notions to the core of a related non-transferable utility cooperative game. In all cases, the nature of the ruling coalition is determined by the power constraint, which requires that the ruling coalition be powerful enough, and by the enforcement constraint, which imposes that no subcoalition of the ruling coalition that commands a majority is self-enforcing. The key insight that emerges from this characterization is that the coalition is made self-enforcing precisely by the failure of its winning subcoalitions to be self-enforcing. This is most simply illustrated by the following simple finding: with simple majority rule, while three-person (or larger) coalitions can be self-enforcing, two-person coalitions are generically not self-enforcing. Therefore, the reasoning in this paper suggests that three-person juntas or councils should be more common than two-person ones. In addition, we provide conditions under which the grand coalition will be the ruling coalition and conditions under which the most powerful individuals will not be included in the ruling coalition. We also use this framework to discuss endogenous party formation.Coalition Formation, Collective Choice, Cooperative Game Theory, Political Economy,Self-Enforcing Coalitions, Stability

Refined best-response correspondence and dynamics

We characterize the smallest faces of the polyhedron of strategy profiles that could possibly be made asymptotically stable under some reasonable deterministic dynamics. These faces are Kalai and Samet's (1984) persistent retracts and are spanned by Basu and Weibull's (1991) CURB sets based on a natural (and, in a well-defined sense, minimal) refinement of the best-reply correspondence. We show that such a correspondence satisfying basic properties such as existence, upper hemi-continuity, and convex-valuedness exists and is unique in most games. We introduce a notion of rationalizability based on this correspondence and its relation to other such concepts. We study its fixed-points and their relations to equilibrium refinements. We find, for instance, that a fixed point of the refined best reply correspondence in the agent normal form of any extensive form game constitutes a perfect Bayesian equilibrium, which is weak perfect Bayesian in every subgame. Finally, we study the index of its fixed point components.Evolutionary game theory, best response dynamics, CURB sets, persistent retracts, asymptotic stability, Nash equilibrium refinements, learning

Mobility promotes and jeopardizes biodiversity in rock-paper-scissors games

Biodiversity is essential to the viability of ecological systems. Species diversity in ecosystems is promoted by cyclic, non-hierarchical interactions among competing populations. Such non-transitive relations lead to an evolution with central features represented by the `rock-paper-scissors' game, where rock crushes scissors, scissors cut paper, and paper wraps rock. In combination with spatial dispersal of static populations, this type of competition results in the stable coexistence of all species and the long-term maintenance of biodiversity. However, population mobility is a central feature of real ecosystems: animals migrate, bacteria run and tumble. Here, we observe a critical influence of mobility on species diversity. When mobility exceeds a certain value, biodiversity is jeopardized and lost. In contrast, below this critical threshold all subpopulations coexist and an entanglement of travelling spiral waves forms in the course of temporal evolution. We establish that this phenomenon is robust, it does not depend on the details of cyclic competition or spatial environment. These findings have important implications for maintenance and evolution of ecological systems and are relevant for the formation and propagation of patterns in excitable media, such as chemical kinetics or epidemic outbreaks.Comment: Final submitted version; the printed version can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature06095 Supplementary movies are available at http://www.theorie.physik.uni-muenchen.de/lsfrey/images_content/movie1.AVI and http://www.theorie.physik.uni-muenchen.de/lsfrey/images_content/movie2.AV