IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2605.02354.html

Compound Attrition Games: A Unified Model for Inter- and Intra-Coalition Rivalry

Author

Listed:
  • Madjid Eshaghi Gordji
  • Mohamad Ali Berahman

Abstract

Strategic competitions in the real world, from wars to geopolitical rivalries, often involve coalitions competing against rival groups. These contests are not simple interactions between unified entities, but multilayered processes in which coalitions face external competition while dealing with internal conflicts over resources and strategy. Existing game-theoretic models typically treat inter-coalition rivalry and intra-coalition competition separately. This paper introduces the Compound Coalition-Attrition Game (CCAG), a unified framework that integrates a war of attrition between coalitions with a simultaneous war of attrition within each coalition. In this model, the endurance of a coalition in external competition is determined by the strategic choices of its members, who compete internally for shares of the outcome. We prove the nonexistence of pure-strategy equilibria and characterize the unique mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium. The analysis reveals feedback effects: external competition intensifies internal conflict, while internal discord weakens external performance. A case study compares traditional commodity markets, including gold, copper, and silver, with cryptocurrency markets, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana, using data from 2018 to 2023 in a simulation framework. The results demonstrate applicability in industrial strategy, corporate decision-making, and geopolitical competition. The CCAG framework provides a tool for analysing complex strategic environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Madjid Eshaghi Gordji & Mohamad Ali Berahman, 2026. "Compound Attrition Games: A Unified Model for Inter- and Intra-Coalition Rivalry," Papers 2605.02354, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2605.02354
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2605.02354
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maria Montero, 2023. "Coalition Formation in Games with Externalities," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 525-548, June.
    2. Stergios Skaperdas, 1996. "Contest success functions (*)," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 7(2), pages 283-290.
    3. Georgiadis, George & Kim, Youngsoo & Kwon, H. Dharma, 2022. "The absence of attrition in a war of attrition under complete information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 171-185.
    4. Konrad, Kai A. & Kovenock, Dan, 2009. "Multi-battle contests," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 256-274, May.
    5. Myatt, David P., 2025. "The impact of perceived strength in the war of attrition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 260-277.
    6. Michael R. Baye & Dan Kovenock & Casper G. Vries, 1996. "The all-pay auction with complete information," Springer Books, in: Roger D. Congleton & Arye L. Hillman & Kai A. Konrad (ed.), 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 1, pages 209-223, Springer.
    7. Calvo, Emilio & Gutiérrez, Esther, 2010. "Solidarity in games with a coalition structure," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 196-203, November.
    8. Gieczewski, Germán, 2025. "Evolving wars of attrition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    9. Okada, Akira & Riedl, Arno, 2005. "Inefficiency and social exclusion in a coalition formation game: experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 278-311, February.
    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. Häfner, Samuel, 2017. "A tug-of-war team contest," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 372-391.
    2. Gilat Levy & Ronnie Razin, 2009. "Gradualism in Dynamic Agenda Formation," STICERD - Theoretical Economics Paper Series 543, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    3. Konrad, Kai A., 2007. "Strategy in contests: an introduction [Strategie in Turnieren – eine Einführung]," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Processes and Governance SP II 2007-01, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    4. Stuart Jordan & Adam Meirowitz, 2012. "Lobbying and discretion," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 49(3), pages 683-702, April.
    5. Barbieri, Stefano & Serena, Marco, 2022. "Biasing dynamic contests between ex-ante symmetric players," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 1-30.
    6. Kimbrough, Erik O. & Laughren, Kevin & Sheremeta, Roman, 2020. "War and conflict in economics: Theories, applications, and recent trends," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 998-1013.
    7. Alberto Vesperoni, 2016. "A contest success function for rankings," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(4), pages 905-937, December.
    8. Laica, Christoph & Lauber, Arne & Sahm, Marco, 2021. "Sequential round-robin tournaments with multiple prizes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 421-448.
    9. 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.
    10. Christian Ewerhart, 2014. "Elastic contests and the robustness of the all-pay auctions," ECON - Working Papers 155, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    11. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    12. Christoph Laica & Arne Lauber & Marco Sahm, 2017. "Sequential Round-Robin Tournaments with Multiple Prizes," CESifo Working Paper Series 6685, CESifo.
    13. Konrad, Kai A., 2004. "Bidding in hierarchies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1301-1308, December.
    14. Jia, Hao & Skaperdas, Stergios & Vaidya, Samarth, 2013. "Contest functions: Theoretical foundations and issues in estimation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 211-222.
    15. Gelder, Alan & Kovenock, Dan, 2017. "Dynamic behavior and player types in majoritarian multi-battle contests," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 444-455.
    16. Deck, Cary & Sheremeta, Roman M., 2019. "The tug-of-war in the laboratory," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    17. Kovenock, Dan & Roberson, Brian, 2011. "Non-partisan ‘get-out-the-vote’ efforts and policy outcomes," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 728-739.
    18. Cole, Matthew T. & Lake, James & Zissimos, Ben, 2021. "Contesting an international trade agreement," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    19. Kyung Hwan Baik & Jong Hwa Lee, 2013. "Endogenous Timing In Contests With Delegation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(4), pages 2044-2055, October.
    20. Liad Wagman & Vincent Conitzer, 2012. "Choosing fair lotteries to defeat the competition," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(1), pages 91-129, February.

    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:2605.02354. 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: https://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.