Making Sense of the Experimental Evidence on Endogenous Timing in Duopoly Markets

The prediction of asymmetric equilibria with Stackelberg outcomes is clearly the most frequent result in the endogenous timing literature. Several experiments have tried to validate this prediction empirically, but failed to find support for it. By contrast, the experiments find that simultaneous-move outcomes are modal and that behavior in endogenous timing games is quite heterogeneous. This paper generalizes Hamilton and Slutsky’s (1990) endogenous timing games by assuming that players are averse to inequality in payoffs. I explore the theoretical implications of inequity aversion and compare them to the empirical evidence. I find that this explanation is able to organize most of the experimental evidence on endogenous timing games. However, inequity aversion is not able to explain delay in Hamilton and Slutsky’s endogenous timing games.Endogenous Timing; Cournot; Stackelberg; Inequity Aversion

Security Games: Solution Concepts and Algorithms

<p>Algorithms for finding game-theoretic solutions are now used in several real-world security applications. Many of these applications are based on different but related game-theoretical models collectively known as security games. Much of the research in this area has focused on the two-player setting in which the first player (leader, defender) commits to a strategy, after which the second player (follower, attacker) observes that strategy and responds to it. This is commonly known as the Stackelberg, or leader-follower, model. If none of the players can observe the actions of the others then such a setting is called a simultaneous-move game. A common solution concept in simultaneous-move games is the Nash equilibrium (NE). In the present dissertation, we contribute to this line of research in two ways.</p><p>First, we consider new ways of modeling commitment. We propose the new model in which the leader can commit to a correlated strategy. We show that this model is equivalent to the Stackelberg model in two-player games and is different from the existing models in games with three or more players. We propose an algorithm for computing a solution to this model in polynomial time. We also consider a leader-follower setting in which the players are uncertain about whether the follower can observe. We describe an iterative algorithm for solving such games.</p><p>Second, we analyze the computational complexity of computing Stackelberg and NE strategies in security games. We describe algorithms to solve some variants of the security game model in polynomial time and prove NP-hardness of solving other variants of the model. We also extend the family of security games by allowing the attacker have multiple resources. We provide an algorithm for computing an NE of such games in polynomial time, and we show that computing a Stackelberg strategy is NP-hard.</p>Dissertatio

The State’s Enforcement Monopoly and the Private Protection of Property

The modern state has monopolized the legitimate use of force. This concept is twofold. First, the state is empowered with enforcement rights; second, the rights of the individuals are (partly) restricted. In a simple model of property rights with appropriation and defense activity, we show that a restriction of private enforcement is beneficial for the property owner, even if there are no economies of scale from public protection. We emphasize the role of the state as a commitment device for a certain level of enforcement. However, commitment will only work if the state can regulate private protection. A ban of private enforcement measures can even be beneficial in situations where there would be no private enforcement at first place because the “shadow” of defense has a negative impact on the investments in property rights infringements. From a legal perspective, our approach emphasizes a regulation of victim behavior as opposed to the standard approach which focuses on the regulation of criminal behavior.Contests, Property Rights, Enforcement, Private Protection, Law

Making Sense of the Experimental Evidence on Endogenous Timing in Duopoly Markets

The prediction of asymmetric equilibria with Stackelberg outcomes is clearly the most frequent result in the endogenous timing literature. Several experiments have tried to validate this prediction empirically, but failed to find support for it. By contrast, the experiments find that simultaneous-move outcomes are modal and that behavior in endogenous timing games is quite heterogeneous. This paper generalizes Saloner’s (1987) and Hamilton and Slutsky’s (1990) endogenous timing games by assuming that players are averse to inequality in payoffs. We explore the theoretical implications of inequity aversion and compare them to the empirical evidence. We find that this explanation is able to organize most of the experimental evidence on endogenous timing games. However, inequity aversion is not able to explain delay in Hamilton and Slutsky’s endogenous timing games.

Leadership Inference for Multi-Agent Interactions

Effectively predicting intent and behavior requires inferring leadership in multi-agent interactions. Dynamic games provide an expressive theoretical framework for modeling these interactions. Employing this framework, we propose a novel method to infer the leader in a two-agent game by observing the agents' behavior in complex, long-horizon interactions. We make two contributions. First, we introduce an iterative algorithm that solves dynamic two-agent Stackelberg games with nonlinear dynamics and nonquadratic costs, and demonstrate that it consistently converges. Second, we propose the Stackelberg Leadership Filter (SLF), an online method for identifying the leading agent in interactive scenarios based on observations of the game interactions. We validate the leadership filter's efficacy on simulated driving scenarios to demonstrate that the SLF can draw conclusions about leadership that match right-of-way expectations.Comment: 8 pages, 5 figures, submitted for publication to IEEE Robotics and Automation Letter

Making Sense of the Experimental Evidence on Endogenous Timing in Duopoly Markets

The prediction of asymmetric equilibria with Stackelberg outcomes is clearly the most frequent result in the endogenous timing literature. Several experiments have tried to validate this prediction empirically, but failed to find support for it. In contrast, these experiments find that simultaneous-move outcomes are modal and that behavior in endogenous timing games is quite heterogeneous. This paper generalizes Hamilton and Slutsky's (Hamilton, J., Slutsky, S., 1990. Endogenous timing in duopoly games: Stackelberg or Cournot equilibria. Games and Economic Behavior 2, 29–46) endogenous timing games by assuming that players are averse to inequality in payoffs. I explore the theoretical implications of inequity aversion and compare them to the empirical evidence. I find that this explanation is able to organize most of the experimental evidence on endogenous timing games. However, inequity aversion is not able to explain delay in Hamilton and Slutsky’s endogenous timing games