https://arxiv.org/api/Tho5kBvrVeVrS8ldKY/rfBDPbE8 2026-03-22T14:40:02Z 3810 120 15 http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20429v2 2026-02-25T05:42:14Z

In practice, auction data are often endogenously censored and anonymous, revealing only limited outcome statistics rather than full bid profiles. We study robust auction design when the seller observes only aggregated, anonymous order statistics and seeks to maximize worst-case expected revenue over all product distributions consistent with the observed statistic. We show that simple and widely used mechanisms are robustly optimal. Specifically, posted pricing is robustly optimal given the distribution of the highest value; the Myerson auction designed for the unique consistent i.i.d. distribution is robustly optimal given the lowest value distribution; and the second-price auction with an optimal reserve is robustly optimal when an intermediate order statistic is observed and the implied i.i.d. distribution is regular above its reserve. More generally, for a broad class of monotone symmetric mechanisms depending only on the top k order statistics, including multi-unit and position auctions, the worst-case revenue is attained under the i.i.d. distribution consistent with the observed k-th order statistic. Our results provide a tractable foundation for non-discriminatory auction design, where fairness and privacy are intrinsic consequences of the information structure rather than imposed constraints.

2026-02-24T00:01:44Z Zhihao Gavin Tang Shixin Wang http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.09406v2 2026-02-25T02:58:09Z

We develop an overlapping generations model where each agent observes a verifiable private signal about the state and, with positive probability, also receives signals disclosed by his predecessor. The agent then takes an action and decides which signals to pass on. Each agent's action has a positive externality on his predecessor and his optimal action increases in his belief about the state. We show that as the probability that messages reach the next generation approaches one, agents become increasingly selective in disclosing information. In the limit, all signals except for the most favorable ones will be concealed.

2026-02-10T04:42:33Z Nemanja Antic Harry Pei http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.21470v1 2026-02-25T00:48:06Z

We ask when a normal-form game yields a single equilibrium prediction, even if players can coordinate by delegating play to an intermediary such as a platform or a cartel. Delegation outcomes are modeled via coarse correlated equilibria (CCE) when the intermediary cannot punish deviators, and via the set of individually rational correlated profiles (IRCP) when it can. We characterize games in which the IRCP or the CCE is unique, uncovering a structural link between these solution concepts. Our analysis also provides new conditions for the uniqueness of classical correlated and Nash equilibria that do not rely on the existence of dominant strategies. The resulting equilibria are robust to players' information about the environment, payoff perturbations, pre-play communication, equilibrium selection, and learning dynamics. We apply these results to collusion-proof mechanism design.

2026-02-25T00:48:06Z Fedor Sandomirskiy Ben Wincelberg http://arxiv.org/abs/2207.01830v3 2026-02-24T16:43:54Z

We study the diffusion of a true and a false message (misinformation) when agents are biased and able to verify messages. As a recipient of a false message who verifies it becomes informed of the truth, a higher prevalence of misinformation can increase the prevalence of the truth. We uncover conditions such that this happens and discuss policy implications. Specifically, a planner aiming to maximize the prevalence of the truth should allow misinformation to circulate if: non-verified messages may be ignored, transmission of information is relatively low, and the planner's budget to induce verification is neither too low nor too high. Homophily increases the spread of misinformation, but also facilitates diffusion of truth, and leads to similar results on the effect of verification.

2022-07-05T06:29:46Z Luca Paolo Merlino Nicole Tabasso http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20868v1 2026-02-24T13:13:17Z

We explore stability and fairness considerations in decentralized networked markets with bilateral contracts, building on the trading networks framework [Hatfield et al., 2013]. In our trading network game, we show that a well-defined subset of Nash equilibria can be supported as competitive equilibria. Considering an offer-based trading dynamic as well as a stochastic price clock market, we prove new convergence results to Nash equilibrium and competitive equilibrium, providing a rationale for stability properties in decentralized, dynamic trading networks. Turning to the tension between fairness and (core) stability, we prove several negative results: inessential agents always receive zero utility in any core outcome, and even essential agents can get zero utility in all core outcomes.

2026-02-24T13:13:17Z Simon Finster Paul W. Goldberg Edwin Lock Matilde Tullii http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.05920v2 2026-02-24T07:48:27Z

This paper studies the implementation of Bayes correlated equilibria in symmetric Bayesian games with nonatomic players, using direct information structures and obedient strategies. The main results demonstrate full implementation in a class of games with negative payoff externalities, such as congestion and Cournot games. Specifically, if the game admits a strictly concave potential in every state, then for every Bayes correlated equilibrium outcome with finite support and rational action distributions, there exists a direct information structure that implements this outcome under all equilibria. When the potential is weakly concave, we show that all equilibria implement the same expected total payoff. Additionally, all Bayes correlated equilibria, including those with infinite support or irrational action distributions, are approximately implemented.

2025-02-09T14:28:30Z Frederic Koessler Marco Scarsini Tristan Tomala http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20518v1 2026-02-24T03:39:19Z

The long-standing unitary-actor assumption in strategy research -- treating firms as monolithic entities with coherent preferences -- misses that organizations are coalitions of individuals with diverse and often conflicting goals. Although behavioral perspectives have challenged this assumption, the field lacks an operational method for deriving an organizational utility function from the disparate preferences of its members and the specific structures used to aggregate them. We develop a mathematical framework that (i) maps individual utility functions into choice probabilities via a random-utility model, (ii) combines those probabilities using an explicit aggregation structure (e.g., unanimity or polyarchy), and (iii) recovers an organizational utility function that rationalizes the collective behavior. This establishes organizational utility functions as operationally meaningful: they summarize and predict organizational choice, yet are generally not simple averages of members' utilities. Instead, aggregation structures systematically reshape preferences -- unanimity approximates the pointwise minima of underlying utility functions, amplifying risk aversion; polyarchy approximates the pointwise maxima, promoting risk-seeking. We illustrate strategic implications in Cournot competition and principal-agent settings, showing how internal aggregation structures shift competitive and collaborative outcomes. Overall, the framework provides a parsimonious way to retrofit unitary-actor models with behaviorally grounded organizational preferences, reconciling the coalition view of the firm with rigorous and tractable strategic analysis.

2026-02-24T03:39:19Z 45 pages, 10 figures Felipe A. Csaszar John C. Eklund http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20439v1 2026-02-24T00:47:41Z

The Vickrey-Clarke-Groves (VCG) mechanism is infamously revenue non-monotone in combinatorial auctions. I.e., when a buyer increases their value for a bundle of items, the total auction revenue may decrease. Combinatorial auctions exhibit complementarities which broadly result in complexities in auction theory. This brief note shows that non-monotonicity in multi-item auctions is not a result of complementarities, and in fact, VCG is revenue non-monotone even in matching markets.

2026-02-24T00:47:41Z Jason Hartline http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20415v1 2026-02-23T23:31:43Z

I prove that competitive market outcomes require computational intractability. If P = NP, firms can efficiently solve the collusion detection problem, identifying deviations from cooperative agreements in complex, noisy markets and thereby making collusion sustainable as an equilibrium. If P != NP, the collusion detection problem is computationally infeasible for markets satisfying a natural instance-hardness condition on their demand structure, rendering punishment threats non-credible and collusion unstable. Combined with Maymin (2011), who proved that market efficiency requires P = NP, this yields a fundamental impossibility: markets can be informationally efficient or competitive, but not both. Artificial intelligence, by expanding firms' computational capabilities, is pushing markets from the competitive regime toward the collusive regime, explaining the empirical emergence of algorithmic collusion without explicit coordination.

2026-02-23T23:31:43Z 31 pages, 1 figure Philip Z. Maymin http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20087v1 2026-02-23T17:56:02Z

A principal screens an agent with an arbitrary set of allocations $X$. The agent's preferences over allocations are comonotonic. A subset of allocations $X^*\subseteq X$ is a surplus-elasticity frontier if (i) any other allocation has a demand curve that is pointwise lower and less elastic than some allocation in $X^*$ and (ii) the allocations in $X^*$ can be ordered in terms of their demand curves such that a higher demand curve is more inelastic. We show that any surplus-elasticity frontier is an optimal menu. Moreover, if the incremental demand curves along the frontier are also ordered by their elasticities, then the frontier is optimal even among stochastic mechanisms. The result is agnostic to type distributions and redistributive welfare weights -- the same frontier remains optimal for a broad class of objectives. As applications, we show how these results immediately yield new insights into optimal bundling, optimal taxation, sequential screening, selling information, and regulating a data-rich monopolist.

2026-02-23T17:56:02Z 73 pages, 2 figures Frank Yang http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.19950v1 2026-02-23T15:17:49Z

We characterize the identified sets of a wide range of stochastic choice models, including random utility, various models of boundedly-rational behavior, and dynamic discrete choice. In each of these settings, we show two distributions over choice rules are observationally equivalent if and only if they can be obtained from one another via a finite sequence of simple swapping transforms. We leverage this to obtain complete descriptions of both the defining inequalities and extreme points of these identified sets. In cases where choice frequencies vary smoothly with some parameters, we provide a novel global-inverse result for practically testing identification.

2026-02-23T15:17:49Z Peter Caradonna Christopher Turansick http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.04494v2 2026-02-23T12:28:46Z

This work contributes to a foundational question in economic theory: how do individual-level cognitive biases interact with collective choice mechanisms? We study a setting where voters hold intrinsic preference rankings over a set of alternatives but cast approval ballots to determine the collective outcome. The ballots are shaped by an anchoring bias: alternatives are presented sequentially by a social planner, and a voter approves an alternative if and only if it is acceptable and strictly preferred to all alternatives previously encountered. We first analyze which approval-based voting rules are anchor-proof, in the sense that they always select the same winner regardless of the presentation order. We show that this requirement is extremely demanding: only very restrictive rules satisfy it. We then turn to the potential influence of the social planner. On the upside, when the planner has no information about the voters' intrinsic preferences, she cannot manipulate the outcome.

2026-02-04T12:38:50Z Federico Fioravanti Zoi Terzopoulou http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.19660v1 2026-02-23T10:09:45Z

This paper studies the efficiency of battery storage operations in electricity markets by comparing the social welfare gain achieved by a central planner to that of a decentralized profit-maximizing operator. The problem is formulated in a generalized continuous-time stochastic setting, where the battery follows an adaptive, non-anticipating policy subject to periodicity and other constraints. We quantify the efficiency loss by bounding the ratio of the optimal welfare gain to the gain under profit maximization. First, for linear price functions, we prove that this ratio is tightly bounded by $4/3$. We show that this bound is a structural invariant: it is robust to arbitrary stochastic demand processes and accommodates general convex operational constraints. Second, we demonstrate that the efficiency loss can be unbounded for general convex price functions, implying that convexity alone is insufficient to guarantee market efficiency. Finally, to bridge these regimes, we analyze monomial price functions, where the degree controls the curvature. For specific discrete demand scenarios, we demonstrate that the ratio is bounded by $2$, independent of the degree.

2026-02-23T10:09:45Z 28 pages, 2 figures Zhile Jiang Xinhao Nie Stratis Skoulakis http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.12542v2 2026-02-23T02:57:49Z

When aggregating Subjective Expected Utility preferences, the Pareto principle leads to an impossibility result unless the individuals have a common belief. This paper examines the source of this impossibility in more detail by considering the aggregation of a general class of incomplete preferences that can represent gradual ambiguity perceptions. Our result shows that the planner cannot avoid ignoring some individuals unless there is a probability distribution that all individuals agree is most plausible. This means that even if individuals have similar ambiguity perceptions, the impossibility persists as long as some individual's most plausible belief differs even slightly from that of others.

2025-08-18T00:41:42Z 16 pages, 1 figure Kensei Nakamura http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.14631v2 2026-02-22T12:12:11Z

In mainstream neoclassical economics, utility maximization is the only engine of individual action, and the other or the social, if it is modeled for decisions deemed fundamental, it is done as a tacit externality parameter affecting an agent's maximized payoff. And even when hitched to a social reference point, a fully decisive and immediate response is invariably assumed. In this paper, we propose a non-standard articulation of the trade-off between personal utility and social distance, one motivated by experimental evidence from psychology, management science, and economics. Our approach deconstructs non-recurrent consumer choice to two stages: a non-decisive first stage in which a binary relation, called one-many ordering, yields an interval, the consideration set, to which the deferred choice is confined; a decisive second stage in which the distance from the average social choice, and future social expectations, are taken into account in present utility. Finally, we embed this indecisive consumer in an exploratory game-theoretic setting, and show that indecisiveness and choice deferral may cause social loss.

2026-02-16T10:42:21Z Alfio Giarlotta M. Ali Khan Angelo Enrico Petralia Francesco Reito