This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Multiperson Bargaining and Strategic Complexity

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Kalyan Chatterjee
Hamid Sabourian

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

We investigate the effect of introducing costs of complexity in the a justification for stationary equilibrium strategies in the class of games where complexity costs matter. As is well-known, in this game every individually rational allocation is sustainable as a Nash equilibrium (also as a subgame perfect equilibrium if players are sufficiently patient and if n>2). Moreover, delays in agreement are also possible in such equilibria. By limiting ourselves to strategies that can be implemented by a machine (automaton) and by suitably modifying the definition of complexity for the purpose of analysing a single extensive form, we find that complexity costs do not reduce the range of possible allocations but they do limit the amount of delay that can occur in any agreement. In particular, we show that in any n-player game, for any allocation z, an agreement on z at any time period t can be sustained as a Nash equilibrium of the machine game with complexity costs if and only if in equilibrium, the machines implement stationary strategies. Finally, we also show that "noisy Nash equilibrium" with complexity costs sustain only the unique stationary subgame perfect equilibrium allocation.

Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Centre for Research into Industry, Enterprise, Finance and the Firm in its series CRIEFF Discussion Papers with number 9808.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Oct 1998
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:san:crieff:9808

Contact details of provider:
Postal: School of Economics and Finance, University of St. Andrews, Fife KY16 9AL
Phone: 01334 462420
Web page: http://www.st-and.ac.uk/%7Ewww_crieff/discpaps.html

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Tatiana Damjanovic).

Related research
Keywords: Complexity costs; agreement delay; automata; noisy Nash equilibrium;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Hannu Vartiainen, 2003. "Auction Design without Commitment," Working Papers 2003.24, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  2. Hamid Sabourian & Jihong Lee, 2004. "Complexity and Efficiency in Repeated Games with Negotiation," Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 401, Econometric Society. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. Tasos Kalandrakis, 2004. "Proposal Rights and Political Power," Wallis Working Papers WP38, University of Rochester - Wallis Institute of Political Economy. [Downloadable!]
  4. Sang-Chul Suh & Quan Wen, 2009. "A multi-agent bilateral bargaining model with endogenous protocol," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 203-226, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Torstensson, Pär, 2005. "Evolutionary Stability in Bargaining with an Asymmetric Breakdown Point," Working Papers 2005:38, Lund University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
  6. Lee, J. & Sabourian, H., 2004. "Complexity and Efficiency in Repeated Games and Negotiation," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0419, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge. [Downloadable!]
  7. Torstensson, Pär, 2005. "An n-person Rubinstein bargaining game," Working Papers 2005:39, Lund University, Department of Economics.
  8. Hamid Sabourian & Jihong Lee, 2004. "Complexity and Efficiency in the Negotiation Game," Econometric Society 2004 North American Winter Meetings 82, Econometric Society. [Downloadable!]
  9. Douglas Gale & Hamid Sabourian, 2003. "Complexity and Competition, Part I: Sequential Matching," Levine's Bibliography 666156000000000199, UCLA Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  10. Hannu Vartiainen, 2008. "Repeated implementation and complexity considerations," Review of Economic Design, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 271-293, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Luca Anderlini & Leonardo Felli, 1998. "Costly Bargaining and Renegotiation - (Now published in Econometrica, 69(4) (March 2001), pp. 377-411.)," STICERD - Theoretical Economics Paper Series 361, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE. [Downloadable!]
  12. Ran Spiegler, 2003. "Simplicity of Beliefs and Delay Tactics in a Concession Game," Levine's Bibliography 506439000000000208, UCLA Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
  13. Jihong Lee & Hamid Sabourian, 2005. "Efficiency in Negotiation: Complexity and Costly Bargaining," Birkbeck Working Papers in Economics and Finance 0505, Birkbeck, Department of Economics, Mathematics & Statistics. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? There is a FAQ (frequently asked questions).

This page was last updated on 2009-11-24.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.