Paper detail

On Equilibria of N-seller and N-buyer Bargaining Games

A group of players which contain n sellers and n buyers bargain over the partitions of n pies. A seller(/buyer) has to reach an agreement with a buyer (/seller) on the division of a pie. The players bargain in a system like the stock market: each seller(buyer) can either offer a selling(buying) price to all buyers(sellers) or accept a price offered by another buyer(seller). The offered prices are known to all. Once a player accepts a price offered by another one, the division of a pie between them is determined. Each player has a constant discounting factor and the discounting factors of all players are common knowledge. In this article, we prove that the equilibrium of this bargaining problem is a unanimous division rate, which is equivalent to Nash bargaining equilibrium of a two-player bargaining game in which the discounting factors of two players are the average of n buyers and the average of n sellers respectively. This result shows the relevance between bargaining equilibrium and general equilibrium of markets.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 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.

Authors

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.