https://arxiv.org/api/gmb2/b1DqfFhRi3ytWlDJHbveQM 2026-03-20T09:01:17Z 3810 0 15 http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.15893v2 2026-03-19T16:26:07Z

We use valid inequalities (cuts) of the binary integer program for winner determination in a combinatorial auction (CA) as "artificial items" that can be interpreted intuitively and priced to generate Artificial Walrasian Equilibria. We thus provide a method for converting a CA problem that admits only non-anonymous, nonlinear bundle prices into one that admits anonymous linear prices over the augmented item space, forestalling ex-post bidder complaints about opaque and strongly discriminatory pricing. To this end, we introduce a refinement of the Walrasian equilibrium which we call a "price-match equilibrium" (PME) in which all prices are justified by providing an iso-revenue reallocation for the hypothetical removal of any single bidder. We prove the existence of PME for any CA and characterize their economic properties and computation. We implement minimally artificial PME rules and compare them with other prominent CA payment rules in the literature.

2025-02-21T19:27:06Z Robert Day Benjamin Lubin http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.09490v2 2026-03-19T15:13:41Z

An agent chooses an action based on her private information and a recommendation from an informed but potentially misaligned adviser. With a known probability, the adviser truthfully reports his signal; with the remaining probability, he can send any message. We characterize optimal robust decision rules that maximize the agent's worst-case expected payoff. Every optimal rule is equivalent to a trust-region policy in belief space: the adviser's reported beliefs are taken at face value if they fall within the trust region but are otherwise clipped to the trust region's boundary. We derive alignment thresholds above which advice is strictly valuable and fully characterize the solution in both binary-state and binary-action environments.

2026-02-10T07:39:20Z Piotr Dworczak Alex Smolin http://arxiv.org/abs/2209.04892v3 2026-03-19T12:55:27Z

In order to identify expertise, forecasters should not be tested by their calibration score, which can always be made arbitrarily small, but rather by their Brier score. The Brier score is the sum of the calibration score and the refinement score; the latter measures how good the sorting into bins with the same forecast is, and thus attests to "expertise." This raises the question of whether one can gain calibration without losing expertise, which we refer to as "calibeating." We provide an easy way to calibeat any forecast, by a deterministic online procedure. We moreover show that calibeating can be achieved by a stochastic procedure that is itself calibrated, and then extend the results to simultaneously calibeating multiple procedures, and to deterministic procedures that are continuously calibrated.

2022-09-11T15:14:17Z Corrected Appendix A.7 + new Appendix A.10. Included: Addendum and Errata to the published journal version (Theoretical Economics, 2023) and to arXiv previous version v2 (2022). Web page: http://www.ma.huji.ac.il/hart/publ.html#calib-beat Theoretical Economics 18 (2023), 4, 1441-1474 Dean P. Foster Sergiu Hart 10.3982/TE5330 http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.01421v6 2026-03-19T10:47:32Z

We investigate the choice of a decision maker (DM) who harms herself, by maximizing in each menu some distortion of her true preference, in which the first i alternatives are moved, in reverse order, to the bottom. This pattern has no empirical power, but it allows to define a degree of self-punishment, which measures the extent of the denial of pleasure adopted by the DM. We characterize irrational choices displaying the lowest degree of self-punishment, and we fully identify the preferences that explain the DM's picks by a minimal denial of pleasure. These datasets account for some well known selection biases, such as second-best procedures, and the handicapped avoidance. Necessary and sufficient conditions for the estimation of the degree of self-punishment of a choice are singled out. Moreover the linear orders whose harmful distortions justify choice data are partially elicited. Finally, we offer a simple characterization of the choice behavior that exhibits the highest degree of self-punishment, and we show that this subclass comprises almost all choices.

2026-01-04T07:55:16Z arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2408.01317 Angelo Enrico Petralia http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.01317v25 2026-03-19T10:45:53Z

In many choice settings self-punishment affects individual taste, by inducing the decision maker (DM) to disregard some of the best options. In these circumstances the DM may not maximize her true preference, but some harmful distortion of it, in which the first i alternatives are shifted, in reverse order, to the bottom. Harmful Random Utility Models (harmful RUMs), which are RUMs whose support is limited to the harmful distortions of some preference, offer a natural representation of the consequences of self-punishment on choices. Harmful RUMs are characterized by the existence of a linear order that allows to recover choice probabilities from selections over the ground set. An algorithm detects self-punishment, and elicits the DM's unobservable tastes that explain the observed choice. Necessary and sufficient conditions for a full identification of the DM's preference and randomization over its harmful distortions are singled out. In all but two cases, there is a unique justification by self-punishment of data. Finally, a degree of self-punishment, which measures the extent of the denial of pleasure adopted by the DM in her decision, is characterized.

2024-08-02T15:12:42Z Angelo Enrico Petralia http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.18609v1 2026-03-19T08:28:35Z

Historical episodes such as the World War I "live-and-let-live" system and the Christmas Truce of 1914 demonstrate that opposing military units can establish spontaneous, local cooperation even in extreme conflict environments. Such cooperative behavior is typically fragile and temporary, while large-scale wars persist. We develop a hierarchical decision problem in which local units adopt contingent strategies that depend on interactions, accumulated payoffs, and signals from a central command. The command authority can impose enforcement that penalizes non-aggression to prolong hostilities. Our model features a continuous space of parametric strategies and formalizes replicator dynamics over the population. We analytically characterize the conditions under which local cooperation emerges as a stable evolutionary equilibrium and identify critical thresholds of central enforcement that destroy cooperative equilibria. We show that stable peace requires either alignment of command incentives with frontline welfare, external constraints on enforcement, or diminishing political returns to conflict. The framework provides a micro-founded explanation for the persistence of war despite locally beneficial cooperation.

2026-03-19T08:28:35Z Leonardo Becchetti Franceso Salustri Nazaria Solferino http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.18563v1 2026-03-19T07:24:39Z

AI agents are increasingly deployed in interactive economic environments characterized by repeated AI-AI interactions. Despite AI agents' advanced capabilities, empirical studies reveal that such interactions often fail to stably induce a strategic equilibrium, such as a Nash equilibrium. Post-training methods have been proposed to induce a strategic equilibrium; however, it remains impractical to uniformly apply an alignment method across diverse, independently developed AI models in strategic settings. In this paper, we provide theoretical and empirical evidence that off-the-shelf reasoning AI agents can achieve Nash-like play zero-shot, without explicit post-training. Specifically, we prove that `reasonably reasoning' agents, i.e., agents capable of forming beliefs about others' strategies from previous observation and learning to best respond to these beliefs, eventually behave along almost every realized play path in a way that is weakly close to a Nash equilibrium of the continuation game. In addition, we relax the common-knowledge payoff assumption by allowing stage payoffs to be unknown and by having each agent observe only its own privately realized stochastic payoffs, and we show that we can still achieve the same on-path Nash convergence guarantee. We then empirically validate the proposed theories by simulating five game scenarios, ranging from a repeated prisoner's dilemma game to stylized repeated marketing promotion games. Our findings suggest that AI agents naturally exhibit such reasoning patterns and therefore attain stable equilibrium behaviors intrinsically, obviating the need for universal alignment procedures in many real-world strategic interactions.

2026-03-19T07:24:39Z Enoch Hyunwook Kang http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.21564v2 2026-03-19T01:57:32Z

We study the $n$-dimensional contest between two asymmetric players with different marginal effort costs, with each dimension (i.e., battle) modeled as a Tullock contest. We allow general identity-independent and budget-balanced prize allocation rules in which each player's prize increases weakly in the number of their victories, e.g., a majority rule. When the discriminatory power of the Tullock winner-selection mechanism is no greater than $2/(n+1)$, a unique equilibrium arises where each player exerts deterministic and identical effort across all dimensions. This condition applies uniformly to all eligible prize allocation rules and all levels of players' asymmetry, and it is tight. Under this condition, we derive the effort-maximizing prize allocation rule: the entire prize is awarded to the player who wins more battles than his opponent by a pre-specified margin, and the prize is split equally if neither player does. When players are symmetric, the majority rule is optimal.

2026-02-25T04:43:15Z Siyuan Fan Zhonghong Kuang Jingfeng Lu http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.18385v1 2026-03-19T01:06:10Z

We present a new solution concept called evolutionarily stable Stackelberg equilibrium (SESS). We study the Stackelberg evolutionary game setting in which there is a single leading player and a symmetric population of followers. The leader selects an optimal mixed strategy, anticipating that the follower population plays an evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) in the induced subgame and may satisfy additional ecological conditions. We consider both leader-optimal and follower-optimal selection among ESSs, which arise as special cases of our framework. Prior approaches to Stackelberg evolutionary games either define the follower response via evolutionary dynamics or assume rational best-response behavior, without explicitly enforcing stability against invasion by mutations. We present algorithms for computing SESS in discrete and continuous games, and validate the latter empirically. Our model applies naturally to biological settings; for example, in cancer treatment the leader represents the physician and the followers correspond to competing cancer cell phenotypes.

2026-03-19T01:06:10Z Sam Ganzfried http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.12140v2 2026-03-18T20:40:18Z

In strategic environments with private information, evaluating a change in policy requires predicting how the equilibrium responds -- but when actions reshape opponents' signals, each agent's optimal response depends on an infinite hierarchy of beliefs about beliefs that has resisted exact analysis for four decades. We provide the first exact equilibrium characterization of finite-player continuous-time LQG games with endogenous signals. Conditioning on primitive Brownian shocks rather than the physical state -- a dynamic analogue of Harsanyi's common-prior construction -- collapses the belief hierarchy onto deterministic two-time kernels, reducing Nash equilibrium to a deterministic fixed point with no truncation and no large-population limit. The characterization yields an explicit information wedge that prices the marginal value of shifting opponents' posteriors. The wedge vanishes precisely when signals are exogenous to controls, formally delineating the boundary where strategic belief manipulation matters, and provides a closed-form mapping from information primitives to equilibrium outcomes.

2026-03-12T16:43:21Z 53 pages, 7 figures Sam Babichenko http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.02686v4 2026-03-18T16:25:46Z

Consider a university assigning students to courses and dorms. While many mechanisms are available, they each have their own drawbacks. Running serial dictatorship once for all goods is highly unfair, but running serial dictatorship separately for each matching problem is inefficient-Pareto improvements can be found via students jointly trading their allocated course and dorm. Alternatively, competitive equilibrium from equal incomes scales combinatorially in the number of items, making implementation and preference elicitation difficult. This paper considers paired serial dictatorship: a novel mechanism where agents signal relative preferences that determine their priority in each market. Any deterministic allocation that arises in equilibrium is Pareto efficient and envy-free, highlighting how seemingly innocuous tie-breaking is the key barrier to optimality and fairness. When agents differ only in relative preferences, paired serial dictatorship ex-ante Pareto dominates running random serial dictatorship independently in each market. Such gains exist even when agents behave simplistically.

2025-01-05T23:32:41Z 43 pages Eric Gao http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.17862v1 2026-03-18T15:49:31Z

We study one-sided matchings with endowments in the absence of money. It is well-known that a competitive equilibrium may not always exist and that the strong core may be empty in this setting [Hylland and Zeckhauser, 1979]. We propose a generalization of competitive equilibria that associates each item with a multi-dimensional price. We show that this solution concept always exists and resides within the rejective core [Konovalov, 2005]. Rejective core stability is strictly stronger than weak core stability: allocations in the rejective core are elements of the weak core, but the opposite is not true. Moreover, we show that the rejective core always converges to the set of competitive equilibria with multi-dimensional prices as the economy grows, demonstrating core convergence in a setting without non-satiation.

2026-03-18T15:49:31Z Mark Braverman Jingyi Liu Eric Xue Chenghan Zhou http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.17772v1 2026-03-18T14:33:24Z

We study a public decision problem in which a finite society selects a public-good level from a closed interval. Agents either have single-peaked preferences or are completely indifferent over the interval; the latter capture abstention or a "none of the above" stance within the decision process. We study this augmented single-peaked domain. On this domain, we characterize the class of rules called target rules with a default. We show that onto-ness and pairwise strategy-proofness characterize this class of rules.

2026-03-18T14:33:24Z Parikshit De Abinash Panda Anup Pramanik http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.17733v1 2026-03-18T14:01:15Z

High-stakes auctions are often preceded by nonbinding communication between bidders and the seller. Motivated by these practices, this paper examines a two-period model in which two bidders send private cheap talk messages to the seller about their valuations, and the seller decides in the second period whether to run a mechanism or take an outside option that disappears if she chooses to run the auction. The seller has commitment within any mechanism she chooses to run, but no commitment over how she uses any information communicated. Despite having potentially asymmetric posteriors after the communication stage, the seller cannot run discriminatory auctions in equilibrium. Under some natural restrictions, any bidder-symmetric perfect Bayesian equilibrium of this model is a threshold equilibrium where the seller runs a second-price auction with a single reserve if and only if both bidders are above the threshold. The seller is better off being able to commit to the restricted class of mechanisms where she must choose a single reserve price.

2026-03-18T14:01:15Z preliminary; comments welcome Eric Yan http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.17948v6 2026-03-18T13:17:16Z

Stable allocations in matching markets with contracts form a complete lattice under substitutable preferences, but little is known about how this structure transforms when the population changes. We study re-equilibration following structured population perturbations. In particular, when workers exit or firms enter, a stable allocation of the original market, when restricted to the perturbed market, typically fails to remain stable but becomes firm-quasi-stable. The set of firm-quasi-stable allocations forms a nonempty complete lattice under the Blair order. On this lattice we define a monotone operator whose fixed points coincide with the stable allocations of the perturbed market. Firm-proposing deferred acceptance corresponds to asynchronous iteration of this operator and converges, from any initial condition, to the minimal stable allocation that dominates the initial state. Our main contribution is to characterize equilibrium transformations across markets. Viewing stability sets as join-semilattices, we show that the re-equilibration map induced by deferred acceptance is order-preserving and, under the law of aggregate demand, becomes a join-semilattice homomorphism between the stability lattices of the original and perturbed markets, admitting an explicit lattice characterization. These results establish that, under structured population changes, re-equilibration can be understood as a structure-preserving transformation between equilibrium lattices.

2023-05-29T08:13:11Z 29 pages Yi-You Yang