Hedonic Games with Graph-restricted Communication

We study hedonic coalition formation games in which cooperation among the players is restricted by a graph structure: a subset of players can form a coalition if and only if they are connected in the given graph. We investigate the complexity of finding stable outcomes in such games, for several notions of stability. In particular, we provide an efficient algorithm that finds an individually stable partition for an arbitrary hedonic game on an acyclic graph. We also introduce a new stability concept -in-neighbor stability- which is tailored for our setting. We show that the problem of finding an in-neighbor stable outcome admits a polynomial-time algorithm if the underlying graph is a path, but is NP-hard for arbitrary trees even for additively separable hedonic games; for symmetric additively separable games we obtain a PLS-hardness result

Optimal Partitions in Additively Separable Hedonic Games

We conduct a computational analysis of fair and optimal partitions in additively separable hedonic games. We show that, for strict preferences, a Pareto optimal partition can be found in polynomial time while verifying whether a given partition is Pareto optimal is coNP-complete, even when preferences are symmetric and strict. Moreover, computing a partition with maximum egalitarian or utilitarian social welfare or one which is both Pareto optimal and individually rational is NP-hard. We also prove that checking whether there exists a partition which is both Pareto optimal and envy-free is $\Sigma_{2}^{p}$-complete. Even though an envy-free partition and a Nash stable partition are both guaranteed to exist for symmetric preferences, checking whether there exists a partition which is both envy-free and Nash stable is NP-complete.Comment: 11 pages; A preliminary version of this work was invited for presentation in the session `Cooperative Games and Combinatorial Optimization' at the 24th European Conference on Operational Research (EURO 2010) in Lisbo

Precise Complexity of the Core in Dichotomous and Additive Hedonic Games

Hedonic games provide a general model of coalition formation, in which a set of agents is partitioned into coalitions, with each agent having preferences over which other players are in her coalition. We prove that with additively separable preferences, it is $\Sigma_2^p$-complete to decide whether a core- or strict-core-stable partition exists, extending a result of Woeginger (2013). Our result holds even if valuations are symmetric and non-zero only for a constant number of other agents. We also establish $\Sigma_2^p$-completeness of deciding non-emptiness of the strict core for hedonic games with dichotomous preferences. Such results establish that the core is much less tractable than solution concepts such as individual stability.Comment: ADT-2017, 15 pages in LNCS styl

Strategyproof Mechanisms for Additively Separable Hedonic Games and Fractional Hedonic Games

Additively separable hedonic games and fractional hedonic games have received considerable attention. They are coalition forming games of selfish agents based on their mutual preferences. Most of the work in the literature characterizes the existence and structure of stable outcomes (i.e., partitions in coalitions), assuming that preferences are given. However, there is little discussion on this assumption. In fact, agents receive different utilities if they belong to different partitions, and thus it is natural for them to declare their preferences strategically in order to maximize their benefit. In this paper we consider strategyproof mechanisms for additively separable hedonic games and fractional hedonic games, that is, partitioning methods without payments such that utility maximizing agents have no incentive to lie about their true preferences. We focus on social welfare maximization and provide several lower and upper bounds on the performance achievable by strategyproof mechanisms for general and specific additive functions. In most of the cases we provide tight or asymptotically tight results. All our mechanisms are simple and can be computed in polynomial time. Moreover, all the lower bounds are unconditional, that is, they do not rely on any computational or complexity assumptions