Dynamic network formation with incomplete information

How do networks form and what is their ultimate topology? Most of the literature that addresses these questions assumes complete information: agents know in advance the value of linking even with agents they have never met and with whom they have had no previous interaction (direct or indirect). This paper addresses the same questions under the much more natural assumption of incomplete information: agents do not know in advance—but must learn—the value of linking. We show that incomplete information has profound implications for the formation process and the ultimate topology. Under complete information, the network topologies that form and are stable typically consist of agents of relatively high value only. Under incomplete information, a much wider collection of network topologies can emerge and be stable. Moreover, even with the same topology, the locations of agents can be very different: An agent can achieve a central position purely as the result of chance rather than as the result of merit. All of this can occur even in settings where agents eventually learn everything so that information, although initially incomplete, eventually becomes complete. The ultimate network topology depends significantly on the formation history, which is natural and true in practice, and incomplete information makes this phenomenon more prevalent.

[1]  John Duffy,et al.  Experiments with network formation , 2008, Games Econ. Behav..

[2]  Michael McBride Imperfect monitoring in communication networks , 2006, J. Econ. Theory.

[3]  Sayantan Ghosal,et al.  Farsighted network formation , 2005, J. Econ. Theory.

[4]  Angelo Mele,et al.  A Structural Model of Segregation in Social Networks , 2010 .

[5]  Mihaela van der Schaar,et al.  Information Production and Link Formation in Social Computing Systems , 2012, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[6]  Douglas Gale,et al.  Bayesian learning in social networks , 2003, Games Econ. Behav..

[7]  Haibo Hu,et al.  Disassortative mixing in online social networks , 2009, 0909.0450.

[8]  A. Galeotti One-way flow networks: the role of heterogeneity , 2004 .

[9]  M. Jackson,et al.  A Strategic Model of Social and Economic Networks , 1996 .

[10]  Rong Rong,et al.  Emergent Star Networks with Ex Ante Homogeneous Agents , 2012 .

[11]  Sanjeev Goyal,et al.  A Noncooperative Model of Network Formation , 2000 .

[12]  A. Galeotti,et al.  The Law of the Few , 2010 .

[13]  Sanjeev Goyal,et al.  Network Formation with Heterogeneous Players , 2002, Games Econ. Behav..

[14]  Antoni Calvó-Armengol,et al.  Centre De Referència En Economia Analítica Barcelona Economics Working Paper Series Working Paper Nº 178 Who's Who in Networks. Wanted: the Key Player Who's Who in Networks. Wanted: the Key Player Barcelona Economics Wp Nº 178 , 2022 .

[15]  A. Vázquez Growing network with local rules: preferential attachment, clustering hierarchy, and degree correlations. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[16]  Frédéric Deroïan Farsighted Strategies in the Formation of a Communication Network , 2003 .

[17]  Yves Zenou,et al.  Nestedness in Networks: A Theoretical Model and Someapplications , 2012 .

[18]  Hans Haller,et al.  Nash Networks with Heterogeneous Agents , 2000 .

[19]  Angelo Mele A Structural Model of Segregation in Social Networks , 2010 .

[20]  Thomas Lux,et al.  On assortative and disassortative mixing in scale-free networks: The case of interbank credit networks , 2013 .

[21]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[22]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[23]  Mihaela van der Schaar,et al.  Strategic Networks: Information Dissemination and Link Formation Among Self-Interested Agents , 2013, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[24]  Michael P. Leung Two-Step Estimation of Network-Formation Models with Incomplete Information , 2015 .

[25]  Brian W. Rogers,et al.  Meeting Strangers and Friends of Friends: How Random are Social Networks? , 2007 .

[26]  Alison Watts,et al.  A Dynamic Model of Network Formation , 2001, Games Econ. Behav..

[27]  Jacob K. Goeree,et al.  In Search of Stars: Network Formation among Heterogeneous Agents , 2007, Games Econ. Behav..

[28]  R. Gilles,et al.  Spatial social networks , 2000 .

[29]  M. Newman,et al.  Scaling and percolation in the small-world network model. , 1999, Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics.

[30]  Matthew O. Jackson,et al.  The Evolution of Social and Economic Networks , 2002, J. Econ. Theory.

[31]  Petter Holme,et al.  Structure and time evolution of an Internet dating community , 2002, Soc. Networks.

[32]  Michael P. Leung,et al.  Two-Step Estimation of Network-Formation Models with Incomplete Information , 2015 .

[33]  Armin Falk,et al.  It's All About Connections: Evidence on Network Formation , 2003 .

[34]  M. Newman,et al.  Mixing patterns in networks. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.