IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/the/publsh/576.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nash implementation with little communication

Author

Listed:
  • , R.

    (Department of Economics, Stanford University)

Abstract

The paper considers the communication complexity (measured in bits or real numbers) of Nash implementation of social choice rules. A key distinction is whether we restrict to the traditional one-stage mechanisms or allow multi-stage mechanisms. For one-stage mechanisms, the paper shows that for a large and important subclass of monotonic choice rules -- called "intersection monotonic" -- the total message space size needed for one-stage Nash implementation is essentially the same as that needed for "verification" (with honest agents who are privately informed about their preferences). According to Segal (2007), the latter is the size of the space of minimally informative budget equilibria verifying the choice rule. However, multi-stage mechanisms allow a drastic reduction in communication complexity. Namely, for an important subclass of intersection-monotonic choice rules (which includes rules based on coalitional blocking such as exact or approximate Pareto efficiency, stability, and envy-free allocations) we propose a two-stage Nash implementation mechanism in which each agent announces no more than two alternatives plus one bit per agent in any play. Such two-stage mechanisms bring about an exponential reduction in the communication complexity of Nash implementation for discrete communication measured in bits, or a reduction from infinite- to low-dimensional continuous communication.

Suggested Citation

  • , R., 2010. "Nash implementation with little communication," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 5(1), January.
  • Handle: RePEc:the:publsh:576
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://econtheory.org/ojs/index.php/te/article/viewFile/20100051/3307/139
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. George F. N. Shoukry, 2019. "Outcome-robust mechanisms for Nash implementation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(3), pages 497-526, March.
    2. David Kempe, 2019. "Communication, Distortion, and Randomness in Metric Voting," Papers 1911.08129, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2019.
    3. Mackenzie, Andrew & Zhou, Yu, 2022. "Menu mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    4. Babaioff, Moshe & Blumrosen, Liad & Schapira, Michael, 2013. "The communication burden of payment determination," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 153-167.
    5. Yakov Babichenko & Leonard J. Schulman, 2015. "Pareto Efficient Nash Implementation Via Approval Voting," Papers 1502.05238, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2017.
    6. Mehmet Barlo & Nuh Aygün Dalkıran, 2022. "Computational implementation," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(4), pages 605-633, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Monotonic social choice rules; Nash implementation; communication complexity; verification; realization; budget sets; price equilibria;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:the:publsh:576. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Martin J. Osborne (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://econtheory.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.