IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v17y1996i1p80-112.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coalition-Proof Equilibrium

Author

Listed:
  • Moreno, Diego
  • Wooders, John

Abstract

We characterize the set of agreements that the players of a non-cooperative game may reach when they have the opportunity to communicate prior to play. We show that communication allows the players to correlate their actions. Therefore, we take the set of correlated strategies as the space of agreements. Since we consider situations where agreements are non-binding, they must not be subject to profitable self-enforcing deviations by coalitions of players. A coalition-proof equilibrium is a correlated strategy from which no coalition has an improving and self-enforcing deviation. A coalition-proof equilibrium exists when there is a correlated strategy which (i) has a support contained in the set of actions that survive the iterated elimination of strictly dominated strategies, and (ii) weakly Pareto dominates every other correlated strategy whose support is contained in that set. Consequently, the unique equilibrium of a dominance solvable game is coalition-proof.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Moreno, Diego & Wooders, John, 1996. "Coalition-Proof Equilibrium," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 80-112, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:17:y:1996:i:1:p:80-112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899-8256(96)90095-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Holmstrom, Bengt & Myerson, Roger B, 1983. "Efficient and Durable Decision Rules with Incomplete Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(6), pages 1799-1819, November.
    2. Aumann, Robert J., 1974. "Subjectivity and correlation in randomized strategies," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 67-96, March.
    3. Ray, Indrajit, 1996. "Coalition-Proof Correlated Equilibrium: A Definition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 56-79, November.
    4. Bernheim, B. Douglas & Peleg, Bezalel & Whinston, Michael D., 1987. "Coalition-Proof Nash Equilibria I. Concepts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-12, June.
    5. Joseph Farrell, 1987. "Cheap Talk, Coordination, and Entry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(1), pages 34-39, Spring.
    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. repec:cte:derepe:3363 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Ray, Indrajit, 1996. "Efficiency in correlated equilibrium," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 157-178, December.
    3. Heller, Yuval, 2010. "Minority-proof cheap-talk protocol," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 394-400, July.
    4. Moreno, Diego & Wooders, John, 1998. "An Experimental Study of Communication and Coordination in Noncooperative Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 47-76, July.
    5. Ohnishi, Kazuhiro, 2018. "Non-Altruistic Equilibria," MPRA Paper 88347, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Heller, Yuval, 2010. "All-stage strong correlated equilibrium," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 184-188, May.
    7. Jobst Heitzig & Forest Simmons, 2012. "Some chance for consensus: voting methods for which consensus is an equilibrium," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(1), pages 43-57, January.
    8. Etro, Federico, 2017. "Research in economics and game theory. A 70th anniversary," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 1-7.
    9. Van Damme, Eric, 2002. "Strategic equilibrium," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 41, pages 1521-1596, Elsevier.
    10. Antonio Cabrales & Michalis Drouvelis & Zeynep Gurguy & Indrajit Ray, 2017. "Transparency is Overrated: Communicating in a Coordination Game with Private Information," CESifo Working Paper Series 6781, CESifo.
    11. Lacker, Jeffrey & Weinberg, John A, 1993. "A Coalition Proof Equilibrium for a Private Information Credit Economy," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 279-296, April.
    12. Gaël Giraud & Céline Rochon, 2003. "Generic efficiency and collusion-proofness in exchange economies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 20(3), pages 405-428, June.
    13. Miettinen, Topi, 2013. "Promises and conventions – An approach to pre-play agreements," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 68-84.
    14. Gossner, Olivier, 1998. "Secure Protocols or How Communication Generates Correlation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 69-89, November.
    15. Bloch, Francis & Dutta, Bhaskar, 2009. "Correlated equilibria, incomplete information and coalitional deviations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 721-728, July.
    16. R. R. Routledge & R. A. Edwards, 2020. "Ambiguity and price competition," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 88(2), pages 231-256, March.
    17. Heller, Yuval & Kuzmics, Christoph, 2024. "Communication, renegotiation and coordination with private values," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 51-76.
    18. Giraud, Gael & Rochon, Celine, 2002. "Consistent collusion-proofness and correlation in exchange economies," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 441-463, December.
    19. Tore Ellingsen & Robert Östling, 2010. "When Does Communication Improve Coordination?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1695-1724, September.
    20. Oscar Volij, 2000. "Communication, credible improvements and the core of an economy with asymmetric information," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 29(1), pages 63-79.
    21. Noe, Thomas H, 1998. "Rationalizable and Coalition Proof Shareholder Tendering Strategies in Corporate Takeovers," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 269-291, November.

    More about this item

    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:17:y:1996:i:1:p:80-112. 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.