IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v122y2020icp370-390.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic decompositions of normal form games: Zero-sum games and potential games

Author

Listed:
  • Hwang, Sung-Ha
  • Rey-Bellet, Luc

Abstract

We introduce new classes of games, called zero-sum equivalent games and zero-sum equivalent potential games, and prove decomposition theorems involving these classes of games. Two games are “strategically equivalent” if, for every player, the payoff differences between two strategies (holding other players' strategies fixed) are identical. A zero-sum equivalent game is a game that is strategically equivalent to a zero-sum game; a zero-sum equivalent potential game is a potential game that is strategically equivalent to a zero-sum game. We also call a game “normalized” if the sum of one player's payoffs, given the other players' strategies, is zero. One of our main decomposition results shows that any normal form game, whether the strategy set is finite or continuous, can be uniquely decomposed into a zero-sum normalized game, a zero-sum equivalent potential game, and an identical interest normalized game, each with distinctive equilibrium properties.

Suggested Citation

  • Hwang, Sung-Ha & Rey-Bellet, Luc, 2020. "Strategic decompositions of normal form games: Zero-sum games and potential games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 370-390.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:122:y:2020:i:c:p:370-390
    DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2020.05.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825620300725
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.geb.2020.05.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michihiro, Kandori & Rob, Rafael, 1998. "Bandwagon Effects and Long Run Technology Choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 30-60, January.
    2. Konrad, Kai A., 2009. "Strategy and Dynamics in Contests," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199549603.
    3. Aumann, Robert J. & Sorin, Sylvain, 1989. "Cooperation and bounded recall," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 5-39, March.
    4. Myerson, Roger B., 1997. "Dual Reduction and Elementary Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 21(1-2), pages 183-202, October.
    5. Partha Dasgupta & Eric Maskin, 1986. "The Existence of Equilibrium in Discontinuous Economic Games, I: Theory," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 53(1), pages 1-26.
    6. Ingela Alger & Jörgen W. Weibull, 2013. "Homo Moralis—Preference Evolution Under Incomplete Information and Assortative Matching," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(6), pages 2269-2302, November.
    7. Arye L. Hillman & John G. Riley, 1989. "Politically Contestable Rents And Transfers," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 17-39, March.
    8. Quint, Thomas & Shubik, Martin, 2002. "A bound on the number of Nash equilibria in a coordination game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 323-327, November.
    9. Morris, Stephen & Ui, Takashi, 2004. "Best response equivalence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 260-287, November.
    10. Yang Cai & Ozan Candogan & Constantinos Daskalakis & Christos Papadimitriou, 2016. "Zero-Sum Polymatrix Games: A Generalization of Minmax," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 648-655, May.
    11. Partha Dasgupta & Eric Maskin, 1986. "The Existence of Equilibrium in Discontinuous Economic Games, II: Applications," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 53(1), pages 27-41.
    12. Josef Hofbauer & Karl H. Schlag, 2000. "Sophisticated imitation in cyclic games," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 10(5), pages 523-543.
    13. Richard Cornes & Roger Hartley, 2005. "Asymmetric contests with general technologies," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(4), pages 923-946, November.
    14. Duggan, John, 2007. "Equilibrium existence for zero-sum games and spatial models of elections," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 52-74, July.
    15. Ui, Takashi, 2000. "A Shapley Value Representation of Potential Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 121-135, April.
    16. Sandholm, William H., 2010. "Decompositions and potentials for normal form games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 446-456, November.
    17. McLennan, Andrew & Park, In-Uck, 1999. "Generic 4 x 4 Two Person Games Have at Most 15 Nash Equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 111-130, January.
    18. Rahul Savani & Bernhard Stengel, 2006. "Hard-to-Solve Bimatrix Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(2), pages 397-429, March.
    19. Hofbauer, Josef & Sandholm, William H., 2009. "Stable games and their dynamics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(4), pages 1665-1693.4, July.
    20. Ozan Candogan & Ishai Menache & Asuman Ozdaglar & Pablo A. Parrilo, 2011. "Flows and Decompositions of Games: Harmonic and Potential Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 474-503, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Santiago Guisasola & Donald Saari, 2020. "With Potential Games, Which Outcome Is Better?," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Amir, Rabah & Machowska, Dominika & Troege, Michael, 2021. "Advertising patterns in a dynamic oligopolistic growing market with decay," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Richard Cornes & Roger Hartley, 2012. "Risk aversion in symmetric and asymmetric contests," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 51(2), pages 247-275, October.
    2. Ewerhart, Christian, 2017. "Contests with small noise and the robustness of the all-pay auction," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 195-211.
    3. Cheikbossian, Guillaume, 2021. "Evolutionarily stable in-group altruism in intergroup conflict over (local) public goods," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 206-226.
    4. Richard Cornes & Roger Hartley, 2012. "Loss Aversion in Contests," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1204, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    5. Morgan, John & Tumlinson, Justin & Várdy, Felix, 2022. "The limits of meritocracy," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    6. Jun Honda, 2018. "Games with the total bandwagon property meet the Quint–Shubik conjecture," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(3), pages 893-912, September.
    7. Franke, Jörg & Leininger, Wolfgang & Wasser, Cédric, 2018. "Optimal favoritism in all-pay auctions and lottery contests," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 22-37.
    8. Jun Honda, 2015. "Games with the Total Bandwagon Property," Department of Economics Working Papers wuwp197, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Department of Economics.
    9. Hefti, Andreas, 2016. "On the relationship between uniqueness and stability in sum-aggregative, symmetric and general differentiable games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 83-96.
    10. Häfner, Samuel, 2017. "A tug-of-war team contest," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 372-391.
    11. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Patricia Esteve‐González & Anwesha Mukherjee, 2023. "Heterogeneity, leveling the playing field, and affirmative action in contests," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 89(3), pages 924-974, January.
    12. Franke, Jörg & Kanzow, Christian & Leininger, Wolfgang & Schwartz, Alexandra, 2014. "Lottery versus all-pay auction contests: A revenue dominance theorem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 116-126.
    13. J. Atsu Amegashie, 2012. "A Nested Contest: Tullock Meets the All-pay Auction," CESifo Working Paper Series 3976, CESifo.
    14. Subhasish M. Chowdhury, 2017. "The All‐Pay Auction with Nonmonotonic Payoff," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 84(2), pages 375-390, October.
    15. Anderson, Simon & Baik, Alicia & Larson, Nathan, 2015. "Personalized pricing and advertising: An asymmetric equilibrium analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 53-73.
    16. Sakshi Gupta & Ram Singh, 2018. "On Existence and Properties of Pure-strategy Equilibria under Contests," Working Papers id:12840, eSocialSciences.
    17. Hefti, Andreas, 2017. "Equilibria in symmetric games: theory and applications," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(3), September.
    18. Franke, Jörg & Leininger, Wolfgang & Wasser, Cédric, 2014. "Revenue Maximizing Head Starts in Contests," Ruhr Economic Papers 524, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    19. Joseph Abdou & Nikolaos Pnevmatikos & Marco Scarsini, 2014. "Uniformity and games decomposition," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 14084r, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne, revised Mar 2017.
    20. Beviá, Carmen & Corchón, Luis C., 2013. "Endogenous strength in conflicts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 297-306.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Decomposition; Zero-sum games; Potential games;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games

    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:eee:gamebe:v:122:y:2020:i:c:p:370-390. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622836 .

    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.