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

On a Simple Hedonic Game with Graph-Restricted Communication

International audienceWe study a hedonic game for which the feasible coalitions are prescribed by a graph representing the agents' social relations. A group of agents can form a feasible coalition if and only if their corresponding vertices can be spanned with a star. This requirement guarantees that agents are connected, close to each other, and one central agent can coordinate the actions of the group. In our game everyone strives to join the largest feasible coalition. We study the existence and computational complexity of both Nash stable and core stable partitions. Then, we provide tight or asymptotically tight bounds on their quality, with respect to both the price of anarchy and stability, under two natural social functions, namely, the number of agents who are not in a singleton coalition, and the number of coalitions. We also derive refined bounds for games in which the social graph is restricted to be claw-free. Finally, we investigate the complexity of computing socially optimal partitions as well as extreme Nash stable ones

Computing Stable Coalitions: Approximation Algorithms for Reward Sharing

Consider a setting where selfish agents are to be assigned to coalitions or projects from a fixed set P. Each project k is characterized by a valuation function; v_k(S) is the value generated by a set S of agents working on project k. We study the following classic problem in this setting: "how should the agents divide the value that they collectively create?". One traditional approach in cooperative game theory is to study core stability with the implicit assumption that there are infinite copies of one project, and agents can partition themselves into any number of coalitions. In contrast, we consider a model with a finite number of non-identical projects; this makes computing both high-welfare solutions and core payments highly non-trivial. The main contribution of this paper is a black-box mechanism that reduces the problem of computing a near-optimal core stable solution to the purely algorithmic problem of welfare maximization; we apply this to compute an approximately core stable solution that extracts one-fourth of the optimal social welfare for the class of subadditive valuations. We also show much stronger results for several popular sub-classes: anonymous, fractionally subadditive, and submodular valuations, as well as provide new approximation algorithms for welfare maximization with anonymous functions. Finally, we establish a connection between our setting and the well-studied simultaneous auctions with item bidding; we adapt our results to compute approximate pure Nash equilibria for these auctions.Comment: Under Revie

Synchronisation Games on Hypergraphs

We study a strategic game model on hypergraphs where players, modelled by nodes, try to coordinate or anti-coordinate their choices within certain groups of players, modelled by hyperedges. We show this model to be a strict generalisation of symmetric additively separable hedonic games to the hypergraph setting and that such games always have a pure Nash equilibrium, which can be computed in pseudo-polynomial time. Moreover, in the pure coordination setting, we show that a strong equilibrium exists and can be computed in polynomial time when the game possesses a certain acyclic structure.</jats:p

Constrained Pure Nash Equilibria in Polymatrix Games

We study the problem of checking for the existence of constrained pure Nash equilibria in a subclass of polymatrix games defined on weighted directed graphs. The payoff of a player is defined as the sum of nonnegative rational weights on incoming edges from players who picked the same strategy augmented by a fixed integer bonus for picking a given strategy. These games capture the idea of coordination within a local neighbourhood in the absence of globally common strategies. We study the decision problem of checking whether a given set of strategy choices for a subset of the players is consistent with some pure Nash equilibrium or, alternatively, with all pure Nash equilibria. We identify the most natural tractable cases and show NP or coNP-completness of these problems already for unweighted DAGs.Comment: Extended version of a paper accepted to AAAI1

On the price of stability of some simple graph-based hedonic games

We consider graph-based hedonic games such as simple symmetric fractional hedonic games and social distance games, where a group of utility maximizing players have hedonic preferences over the players’ set, and wish to be partitioned into clusters so that they are grouped together with players they prefer. The players are nodes in a connected graph and their preferences are defined so that shorter graph distance implies higher preference. We are interested in Nash equilibria of such games, where no player has an incentive to unilaterally deviate to another cluster, and we focus on the notion of the price of stability. We present new and improved bounds on the price of stability for several graph classes, as well as for a slightly modified utility function

Network partitioning algorithms as cooperative games

International audienceThe paper is devoted to game-theoretic methods for community detection in networks. The traditional methods for detecting community structure are based on selecting dense subgraphs inside the network. Here we propose to use the methods of cooperative game theory that highlight not only the link density but also the mechanisms of cluster formation. Specifically, we suggest two approaches from cooperative game theory: the first approach is based on the Myerson value, whereas the second approach is based on hedonic games. Both approaches allow to detect clusters with various resolutions. However, the tuning of the resolution parameter in the hedonic games approach is particularly intuitive. Furthermore, the modularity-based approach and its generalizations as well as ratio cut and normalized cut methods can be viewed as particular cases of the hedonic games. Finally, for approaches based on potential hedonic games we suggest a very efficient computational scheme using Gibbs sampling