IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2510.03446.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Downside Risk-Aware Equilibria for Strategic Decision-Making

Author

Listed:
  • Oliver Slumbers
  • Benjamin Patrick Evans
  • Sumitra Ganesh
  • Leo Ardon

Abstract

Game theory has traditionally had a relatively limited view of risk based on how a player's expected reward is impacted by the uncertainty of the actions of other players. Recently, a new game-theoretic approach provides a more holistic view of risk also considering the reward-variance. However, these variance-based approaches measure variance of the reward on both the upside and downside. In many domains, such as finance, downside risk only is of key importance, as this represents the potential losses associated with a decision. In contrast, large upside "risk" (e.g. profits) are not an issue. To address this restrictive view of risk, we propose a novel solution concept, downside risk aware equilibria (DRAE) based on lower partial moments. DRAE restricts downside risk, while placing no restrictions on upside risk, and additionally, models higher-order risk preferences. We demonstrate the applicability of DRAE on several games, successfully finding equilibria which balance downside risk with expected reward, and prove the existence and optimality of this equilibria.

Suggested Citation

  • Oliver Slumbers & Benjamin Patrick Evans & Sumitra Ganesh & Leo Ardon, 2025. "Downside Risk-Aware Equilibria for Strategic Decision-Making," Papers 2510.03446, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2510.03446
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2510.03446
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fudenberg Drew & Kreps David M., 1993. "Learning Mixed Equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 320-367, July.
    2. John C. Harsanyi & Reinhard Selten, 1988. "A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262582384, December.
    3. Dipankar Mondal & N. Selvaraju, 2022. "Convexity, two-fund separation and asset ranking in a mean-LPM portfolio selection framework," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 44(1), pages 225-248, March.
    4. Paul Goldberg & Rahul Savani & Troels Sørensen & Carmine Ventre, 2013. "On the approximation performance of fictitious play in finite games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(4), pages 1059-1083, November.
    5. Ľuboš Pástor & Robert F. Stambaugh, 2012. "Are Stocks Really Less Volatile in the Long Run?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 67(2), pages 431-478, April.
    6. Mark L. Egan & Alexander MacKay & Hanbin Yang, 2021. "What Drives Variation in Investor Portfolios? Estimating the Roles of Beliefs and Risk Preferences," NBER Working Papers 29604, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. McKelvey Richard D. & Palfrey Thomas R., 1995. "Quantal Response Equilibria for Normal Form Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 6-38, July.
    8. Trino-Manuel Ñíguez & Ivan Paya & David Peel & Javier Perote, 2015. "Higher-order risk preferences, constant relative risk aversion and the optimal portfolio allocation," Working Papers 1520, Banco de España.
    9. Cumova, Denisa & Nawrocki, David, 2011. "A symmetric LPM model for heuristic mean-semivariance analysis," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 217-236, May.
    10. Rui Albuquerque, 2012. "Skewness in Stock Returns: Reconciling the Evidence on Firm Versus Aggregate Returns," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 25(5), pages 1630-1673.
    11. Merton, Robert C., 1972. "An Analytic Derivation of the Efficient Portfolio Frontier," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(4), pages 1851-1872, September.
    12. Alos-Ferrer, Carlos & Ania, Ana B., 2005. "The asset market game," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1-2), pages 67-90, February.
    13. Konstantinos Georgalos & Ivan Paya & David Peel, 2023. "Higher order risk attitudes: new model insights and heterogeneity of preferences," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(1), pages 145-192, March.
    14. Monderer, Dov & Shapley, Lloyd S., 1996. "Fictitious Play Property for Games with Identical Interests," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 258-265, January.
    15. Nawrocki, David N., 1992. "The characteristics of portfolios selected by n-degree Lower Partial Moment," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 195-209.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Benaïm, Michel & Hofbauer, Josef & Hopkins, Ed, 2009. "Learning in games with unstable equilibria," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(4), pages 1694-1709, July.
    2. Hofbauer, Josef & Hopkins, Ed, 2005. "Learning in perturbed asymmetric games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 133-152, July.
    3. Jiayang Li & Zhaoran Wang & Yu Marco Nie, 2023. "Wardrop Equilibrium Can Be Boundedly Rational: A New Behavioral Theory of Route Choice," Papers 2304.02500, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    4. Hofbauer,J. & Sandholm,W.H., 2001. "Evolution and learning in games with randomly disturbed payoffs," Working papers 5, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    5. Willemien Kets, 2007. "The minority game: An economics perspective," Papers 0706.4432, arXiv.org.
    6. Pangallo, Marco & Sanders, James B.T. & Galla, Tobias & Farmer, J. Doyne, 2022. "Towards a taxonomy of learning dynamics in 2 × 2 games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1-21.
    7. Bosch-Domènech, Antoni & Vriend, Nicolaas J., 2013. "On the role of non-equilibrium focal points as coordination devices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 52-67.
    8. Philippe Jehiel & Aviman Satpathy, 2024. "Learning to be Indifferent in Complex Decisions: A Coarse Payoff-Assessment Model," Papers 2412.09321, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2024.
    9. Anthonisen, Niels, 1997. "On the Convergence of Beliefs within Populations in Games with Learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 169-184, September.
    10. Zhang, Boyu & Hofbauer, Josef, 2016. "Quantal response methods for equilibrium selection in 2×2 coordination games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 19-31.
    11. Dieter Balkenborg & Rosemarie Nagel, 2016. "An Experiment on Forward vs. Backward Induction: How Fairness and Level k Reasoning Matter," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 17(3), pages 378-408, August.
    12. Hopkins, Ed, 1999. "Learning, Matching, and Aggregation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 79-110, January.
    13. Haruvy, Ernan & Stahl, Dale O., 2007. "Equilibrium selection and bounded rationality in symmetric normal-form games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 98-119, January.
    14. DeJong, D.V. & Blume, A. & Neumann, G., 1998. "Learning in Sender-Receiver Games," Other publications TiSEM 4a8b4f46-f30b-4ad2-bb0c-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Philippe Bich, 2016. "Prudent Equilibria and Strategic Uncertainty in Discontinuous Games," Working Papers halshs-01337293, HAL.
    16. DavidP. Myatt & Chris Wallace, 2009. "Evolution, Teamwork and Collective Action: Production Targets in the Private Provision of Public Goods," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(534), pages 61-90, January.
    17. Heijmans, Roweno J.R.K. & Suetens, Sigrid, 2025. "Comparing Subsidies to Solve Coordination Failure," Discussion Papers 2025/9, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    18. Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli, 2020. "The evolution of conventions under condition-dependent mistakes," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 69(2), pages 497-521, March.
    19. Miguel A Costa-Gomes & Vincent P Crawford & Nagore Iriberri, 2008. "Comparing Models of Strategic Thinking in Van Huyck, Battalio, and Beil’s Coordination Games," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000002346, David K. Levine.
    20. Edward Cartwright & Anna Stepanova, 2017. "Efficiency in a forced contribution threshold public good game," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(4), pages 1163-1191, November.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2510.03446. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.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.