Paper detail

Greediness and Equilibrium in Congestion Games

Rosenthal (1973) introduced the class of congestion games and proved that they always possess a Nash equilibrium in pure strategies. Fotakis et al. (2005) introduce the notion of a greedy strategy tuple, where players sequentially and irrevocably choose a strategy that is a best response to the choice of strategies by former players. Whereas the former solution concept is driven by strong assumptions on the rationality of the players and the common knowledge thereof, the latter assumes very little rationality on the players' behavior. From Fotakis \cite{fotakis10} it follows that for Tree Representable congestion Games greedy behavior leads to a NE. In this paper we obtain necessary and sufficient conditions for the equivalence of these two solution concepts. Such equivalence enhances the viability of these concepts as realistic outcomes of the environment. The conditions for such equivalence to emerge for monotone symmetric games is that the strategy set has a tree-form, or equivalently is a `extension-parallel graph'.

preprint2012arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.