Paper detail

Effects of Information Heterogeneity in Bayesian Routing Games

This article studies the value of information in route choice decisions when a fraction of players have access to high accuracy information about traffic incidents relative to others. To model such environments, we introduce a Bayesian congestion game, in which players have private information about incidents, and each player chooses her route on a network of parallel links. The links are prone to incidents that occur with an ex-ante known probability. The demand is comprised of two player populations: one with access to high accuracy incident information and another with low accuracy information, i.e. the populations differ only by their access to information. The common knowledge includes: (i) the demand and route cost functions, (ii) the fraction of highly-informed players, (iii) the incident probability, and (iv) the marginal type distributions induced by the information structure of the game. We present a full characterization of the Bayesian Wardrop Equilibrium of this game under the assumption that low information players receive no additional information beyond common knowledge. We also compute the cost to individual players and the social cost as a function of the fraction of highly-informed players when they receive perfectly accurate information. Our first result suggests that below a certain threshold of highly-informed players, both populations experience a reduction in individual cost, with the highly-informed players receiving a greater reduction. However, above this threshold, both populations realize the same equilibrium cost. Secondly, there exists another (lower or equal) threshold above which a further increase in the fraction of highly-informed players does not reduce the expected social costs. Thus, once a sufficiently large number of players are highly informed, wider distribution of more accurate information is ineffective at best, and otherwise socially harmful.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.