Values for Markovian coalition processes

Time series of coalitions (so-called scenarios) are studied that describe processes of coalition formation where several players may enter or leave the current coalition at any point in (discrete) time and convergence to the grand coalition is not necessarily prescribed. Transitions from one coalition to the next are assumed to be random and to yield a Markov chain. Three examples of such processes (the Shapley-Weber process, the Metropolis process, and an example of a voting situation) and their properties are presented. A main contribution includes notions of value for such series, i.e., schemes for the evaluation of the expected contribution of a player to the coalition process relative to a given cooperative game. Particular processes permit to recover the classical Shapley value. This methodology’s power is illustrated with well-known examples from exchange economies due to Shafer (Econometrica 48:467–476, 1980) and Scafuri and Yannelis (Econometrica 52:1365–1368, 1984), where the classical Shapley value leads to counterintuitive allocations. The Markovian process value avoids these drawbacks and provides plausible results.

[1]  Lloyd S. Shapley,et al.  Additive and non-additive set functions , 1953 .

[2]  L. S. Shapley,et al.  17. A Value for n-Person Games , 1953 .

[3]  N. Metropolis,et al.  Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines , 1953, Resonance.

[4]  Robert J. Weber,et al.  Probabilistic Values for Games , 1977 .

[5]  Wayne Shafer,et al.  On the Existence and Interpretation of Value Allocation , 1980 .

[6]  A. Roth Values for Games without Sidepayments: Some Difficulties with Current Concepts , 1980 .

[7]  S. Hart,et al.  On the endogenous formation of coalitions , 1983 .

[8]  E. Kalai,et al.  On weighted Shapley values , 1983 .

[9]  N. Yannelis,et al.  Non-symmetric Cardinal Value Allocations , 1984 .

[10]  R. Aumann On the Non-transferable Utility Value: A Comment on the Roth-Shafer Examples [Values for Games without Side Payments: Some Difficulties with Current Concepts] [On the Existence and Interpretation of Value Allocations] , 1985 .

[11]  R. Aumann Value, Symmetry, and Equal Treatment: A Comment [Non-symmetric Cardinal Value Allocations] , 1987 .

[12]  A. Deemen Coalition Formation in Social Choice Games , 1997 .

[13]  L. Xue,et al.  Coalitional stability under perfect foresight , 1998 .

[14]  Debraj Ray,et al.  Coalition formation as a dynamic process , 2003, J. Econ. Theory.

[15]  Lloyd S. Shapley,et al.  On authority distributions in organizations: equilibrium , 2003, Games Econ. Behav..

[16]  M. Breton,et al.  Stable partitions in a model with group-dependent feasible sets , 2005 .

[17]  Jana Hajduková,et al.  Coalition Formation Games: a Survey , 2006, IGTR.

[18]  G. Laan,et al.  Component efficient solutions in line-graph games with applications , 2007 .

[19]  Gustavo Bergantiños,et al.  A characterization of optimistic weighted Shapley rules in minimum cost spanning tree problems , 2008 .

[20]  Michel Grabisch,et al.  Measuring influence in command games , 2008, Soc. Choice Welf..

[21]  Steven A. Lippman,et al.  The asymptotic shapley value for a simple market game , 2009 .

[22]  Michel Grabisch,et al.  Influence functions, followers and command games , 2011, Games Econ. Behav..

[23]  Ulrich Faigle,et al.  A system-theoretic model for cooperation, interaction and allocation , 2011, Discret. Appl. Math..

[24]  Axiomatizations of two types of Shapley values for games on union closed systems , 2011 .

[25]  Michel Grabisch,et al.  A coalition formation value for games in partition function form , 2012, Eur. J. Oper. Res..