Generating Empirical Core Size Distributions of Hedonic Games Using a Monte Carlo Method

Hedonic games have gained popularity over the last two decades, leading to several research articles that have used analytical methods to understand their properties better. In this paper, a Monte Carlo method, a numerical approach, is used instead. Our method includes a technique for representing, and generating, random hedonic games. We were able to create and solve, using core stability, millions of hedonic games with up to 16 players. Empirical distributions of the hedonic games’ core sizes were generated, using our results, and analyzed for games of up to 13 players. Results from games of 14–16 players were used to validate our research findings. Our results indicate that core partition size might follow the gamma distribution for games with a large number of players.

Additively Separable Hedonic Games with Social Context

In hedonic games, coalitions are created as a result of the strategic interaction of independent players. In particular, in additively separable hedonic games, every player has valuations for all other ones, and the utility for belonging to a coalition is given by the sum of the valuations for all other players belonging to it. So far, non-cooperative hedonic games have been considered in the literature only with respect to totally selfish players. Starting from the fundamental class of additively separable hedonic games, we define and study a new model in which, given a social graph, players also care about the happiness of their friends: we call this class of games social context additively separable hedonic games (SCASHGs). We focus on the fundamental stability notion of Nash equilibrium, and study the existence, convergence and performance of stable outcomes (with respect to the classical notions of price of anarchy and price of stability) in SCASHGs. In particular, we show that SCASHGs are potential games, and therefore Nash equilibria always exist and can be reached after a sequence of Nash moves of the players. Finally, we provide tight or asymptotically tight bounds on the price of anarchy and the price of stability of SCASHGs.

Relaxed Core Stability in Fractional Hedonic Games

The core is a well-known and fundamental notion of stability in games intended to model coalition formation such as hedonic games. The fact that the number of deviating agents (that have to coordinate themselves) can be arbitrarily high, and the fact that agents may benefit only by a tiny amount from their deviation (while they could incur in a cost for deviating), suggest that the core is not able to suitably model many practical scenarios in large and highly distributed multi-agent systems. For this reason, we consider relaxed core stable outcomes where the notion of permissible deviations is modified along two orthogonal directions: the former takes into account the size of the deviating coalition, and the latter the amount of utility gain for each member of the deviating coalition. These changes result in two different notions of stability, namely, the q-size core and k-improvement core. We investigate these concepts of stability in fractional hedonic games, that is a well-known subclass of hedonic games for which core stable outcomes are not guaranteed to exist and it is computationally hard to decide nonemptiness of the core. Interestingly, the considered relaxed notions of core also possess the appealing property of recovering, in some notable cases, the convergence, the existence and the possibility of computing stable solutions in polynomial time.

Loyalty in Cardinal Hedonic Games

A common theme of decision making in multi-agent systems is to assign utilities to alternatives, which individuals seek to maximize. This rationale is questionable in coalition formation where agents are affected by other members of their coalition. Based on the assumption that agents are benevolent towards other agents they like to form coalitions with, we propose loyalty in hedonic games, a binary relation dependent on agents' utilities. Given a hedonic game, we define a loyal variant where agents' utilities are defined by taking the minimum of their utility and the utilities of agents towards which they are loyal. This process can be iterated to obtain various degrees of loyalty, terminating in a locally egalitarian variant of the original game. We investigate axioms of group stability and efficiency for different degrees of loyalty. Specifically, we consider the problem of finding coalition structures in the core and of computing best coalitions, obtaining both positive and intractability results. In particular, the limit game possesses Pareto optimal coalition structures in the core.

Testing stability properties in graphical hedonic games

In hedonic games, players form coalitions based on individual preferences over the group of players they could belong to. Several concepts to describe the stability of coalition structures in a game have been proposed and analysed in the literature. However, prior research focuses on algorithms with time complexity that is at least linear in the input size. In the light of very large games that arise from, e.g., social networks and advertising, we initiate the study of sublinear time property testing algorithms for existence and verification problems under several notions of coalition stability in a model of hedonic games represented by graphs with bounded degree. In graph property testing, one shall decide whether a given input has a property (e.g., a game admits a stable coalition structure) or is far from it, i.e., one has to modify at least an $$\epsilon$$ ϵ -fraction of the input (e.g., the game’s preferences) to make it have the property. In particular, we consider verification of perfection, individual rationality, Nash stability, (contractual) individual stability, and core stability. While there is always a Nash-stable coalition structure (which also implies individually stable coalitions), we show that the existence of a perfect coalition structure is not tautological but can be tested. All our testers have one-sided error and time complexity that is independent of the input size.

Strategyproof Mechanisms for Additively Separable and Fractional Hedonic Games

Additively separable hedonic games and fractional hedonic games have received considerable attention in the literature. They are coalition formation games among selfish agents based on their mutual preferences. Most of the work in the literature characterizes the existence and structure of stable outcomes (i.e., partitions into coalitions) assuming that preferences are given. However, there is little discussion of this assumption. In fact, agents receive different utilities if they belong to different coalitions, and thus it is natural for them to declare their preferences strategically in order to maximize their benefit. In this paper we consider strategyproof mechanisms for additively separable hedonic games and fractional hedonic games, that is, partitioning methods without payments such that utility maximizing agents have no incentive to lie about their true preferences. We focus on social welfare maximization and provide several lower and upper bounds on the performance achievable by strategyproof mechanisms for general and specific additive functions. In most of the cases we provide tight or asymptotically tight results. All our mechanisms are simple and can be run in polynomial time. Moreover, all the lower bounds are unconditional, that is, they do not rely on any computational complexity assumptions.