Abstract
The problem of \(\boldsymbol{k}\)-tiered coalition formation games (\(\boldsymbol{k}\)-TCFGs) has been considered for ranking members of a stochastic, intransitive round robin tournament, with the restriction that the ordering must have exactly \(\boldsymbol{k}\) nonempty ranks for some integer \(\boldsymbol{k}\). As with other coalition formation games, an outcome of a \(\boldsymbol{k}\)-TCFG may be evaluated for its stability, using the notions of Nash stability or core stability. An outcome is Nash stable if no one agent can move to a more preferable position, either by forming its own coalition or joining an existing one. An outcome is core stable if no set of agents can form a new coalition such that all agents in the set benefit. Previous research on \(\boldsymbol{k}\)-TCFGs has focused on preferences derived from matchups, and has indicated that, under these matchup-oriented preferences, core stable outcomes may be significantly easier to find than Nash stable outcomes. However, the extent of this trend has not been explored. Here, we prove that for a key subset of \(\boldsymbol{k}\)-TCFGs with matchup-oriented preferences, there is always at least one core stable partition. We include an illustration of the difference between Nash stabilizability and core stabilizability on an example game. We introduce a preference notation that can be used to represent any preference framework for \(\boldsymbol{k}\)-TCFGs, and prove that under the subset of \(\boldsymbol{k}\)-TCFGs which this notation can represent within polynomial space, the problem of determining if a game has a Nash stable list is NP-complete.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
See http://www.ija-usa.com/jouster-certification-ranking.html for the true part of this.
- 2.
For instance, a Pareto optimal partition is necessarily contractually individually stable. Neither of these properties feature in this work, so they will not be defined here.
- 3.
This property at \(k=n\) has not been explicitly stated for k-TCFGs in previous work, but follows trivially from results found by Siler in the paper that introduced TCFGs [1].
- 4.
References
Siler, C.: Tiered coalition formation games. In: The International FLAIRS Conference Proceedings, vol. 30, pp. 210–214 (2017)
Arnold, N., Goldsmith, J., Snider, S.: Extensions to tiered coalition formation games. In: The International FLAIRS Conference Proceedings, vol. 35 (2022). https://doi.org/10.32473/flairs.v35i.130708
Akin, E.: Generalized intransitive dice: mimicking an arbitrary tournament. J. Dyn. Games 8(1), 1–20 (2020)
Saarinen, S., Tovey, C.A., Goldsmith, J.: A model for intransitive preferences. In: Workshops at the Twenty-Eighth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2014)
Arnold, N., Snider, S., Goldsmith, J.: Socially conscious stability for tiered coalition formation games. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. (2023). https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10472-023-09897-4
Bullinger, M.: Pareto-optimality in cardinal hedonic games. In: AAMAS, vol. 20, pp. 213–221 (2020)
Waxman, N., Kraus, S., Hazon, N.: On maximizing egalitarian value in kcoalitional hedonic games. arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.10772 (2020)
Bogomolnaia, A., Jackson, M.O.: The stability of hedonic coalition structures. Games Econom. Behav. 38(2), 201–230 (2002)
Banerjee, S., Konishi, H., Sonmez, T.: Core in a simple coalition formation game. Soc. Choice Welfare 18, 135–153 (2001)
Brandl, F., Brandt, F., Strobel, M.: Fractional hedonic games: individual and group stability. In: Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 1219–1227 (2015)
Schlueter, J., Goldsmith, J.: Super altruistic hedonic games. In: The International FLAIRS Conference Proceedings, vol. 33, pp. 160–165 (2020)
Spradling, M., Goldsmith, J.: Stability in role based hedonic games. In: The International FLAIRS Conference Proceedings, vol. 28, pp. 85–90 (2015)
Karp, R.M.: Reducibility among combinatorial problems. In: Complexity of Computer Computations (1972). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-2001-2_9
Anshelevich, E., Dasgupta, A., Kleinberg, J., Tardos, É., Wexler, T., Roughgarden, T.: The price of stability for network design with fair cost allocation. SIAM J. Comput. 38(4), 1602–1623 (2008)
Koutsoupias, E., Papadimitriou, C.: Worst-case equilibria. In: Meinel, C., Tison, S. (eds.) STACS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1563, pp. 404–413. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49116-3_38
Monaco, G., Moscardelli, L., Velaj, Y.: Stable outcomes in modified fractional hedonic games. Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst. 34(1), 4 (2020)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Ethics declarations
Declarations
\(\bullet \) Materials availability: A copy of the code used in the investigation in Section 4 is available at: https://github.com/naroarnold/ktcfg-nash-core.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2025 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Arnold, N., Goldsmith, J. (2025). Core Stability and Nash Stability in k-Tiered Coalition Formation Games. In: Freeman, R., Mattei, N. (eds) Algorithmic Decision Theory. ADT 2024. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 15248. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-73903-3_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-73903-3_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-73902-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-73903-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)