https://arxiv.org/api/00M/qf++N0U94VI7RTrXVo1vixc 2026-03-26T15:38:55Z 3826 210 15 http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.11831v1 2026-02-12T11:20:08Z

Assessing an individual's contribution within a team remains a fundamental challenge across many domains, particularly when recognition for collective achievements is limited to only a few members. This issue is especially important in professional road cycling, where personal success depends on both individual talent and group effort. Existing points-based ranking systems tend to disproportionately reward high-scoring team leaders while undervaluing domestiques - riders who sacrifice personal success to support group performance. To better capture a rider's impact on the team, we propose a weighted measure of cycling productivity that factors in race points, a redistribution metric, and an adapted version of the CoScore formula. This formula assesses an individual's productivity relative to their teammates' performance. Using data from the 2023 season, we show that our approach offers a comprehensive evaluation of professional cyclists, addressing key limitations of existing ranking systems.

2026-02-12T11:20:08Z Aitor Calo-Blanco http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.11601v1 2026-02-12T05:32:44Z

We present a collaboration ring model -- a network of players playing the prisoner's dilemma game and collaborating among the nearest neighbours by forming coalitions. The microscopic stochastic updating of the players' strategies are driven by their innate nature of seeking selfish gains and shared intentionality. Cooperation emerges in such a structured population through non-equilibrium phase transitions driven by propensity of the players to collaborate and by the benefit that a cooperator generates. The robust results are qualitatively independent of number of neighbours and collaborators.

2026-02-12T05:32:44Z Joy Das Bairagya Jonathan Newton Sagar Chakraborty http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.08464v2 2026-02-12T01:56:59Z

A goodness-of-fit index measures the consistency of consumption data with a given model of utility-maximization. We show that for the class of well-behaved (i.e., continuous and increasing) utility functions there is no goodness-of-fit index that is continuous and accurate, where the latter means that a perfect score is obtained if and only if a dataset can be rationalized by a well-behaved utility function. While many standard goodness-of-fit indices are inaccurate we show that these indices are (in a sense we make precise) essentially accurate. Goodness-of-fit indices are typically generated by loss functions and we find that standard loss functions usually do not yield a best-fitting utility function when they are minimized. Nonetheless, welfare comparisons can be made by working out a robust preference relation from the data.

2024-05-14T09:35:47Z Yujian Chen Joshua Lanier John K. -H. Quah http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.10053v2 2026-02-11T23:54:22Z

Standard models of bounded rationality typically assume agents either possess accurate knowledge of the population's reasoning abilities (Cognitive Hierarchy) or hold dogmatic, degenerate beliefs (Level-$k$). We introduce the ``Connected Minds'' model, which unifies these frameworks by integrating iterative reasoning with a parameterized network bias. We posit that agents do not observe the global population; rather, they observe a sample biased by their network position, governed by a locality parameter $p$ representing algorithmic ranking, social homophily, or information disclosure. We show that this parameter acts as a continuous bridge: the model collapses to the myopic Level-$k$ recursion as networks become opaque ($p \to 0$) and recovers the standard Cognitive Hierarchy model under full transparency ($p=1$). Theoretically, we establish that network opacity induces a \emph{Sophisticated Bias}, causing agents to systematically overestimate the cognitive depth of their opponents while preserving the log-concavity of belief distributions. This makes $p$ an actionable lever: a planner or platform can tune transparency, globally or by segment (a personalized $p_k$), to shape equilibrium behavior. From a mechanism design perspective, we derive the \emph{Escalation Principle}: in games of strategic complements, restricting information can maximize aggregate effort by trapping agents in echo chambers where they compete against hallucinated, high-sophistication peers. Conversely, we identify a \emph{Transparency Reversal} for coordination games, where maximizing network visibility is required to minimize variance and stabilize outcomes. Our results suggest that network topology functions as a cognitive zoom lens, determining whether agents behave as local imitators or global optimizers.

2026-02-10T18:19:33Z 34 pages, 6 figures Raman Ebrahimi Sepehr Ilami Babak Heydari Isabel Trevino Massimo Franceschetti http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.22250v2 2026-02-11T22:10:57Z

Medical ``Crisis Standards of Care'' call for a utilitarian allocation of scarce resources in emergencies, while favoring the worst-off under normal conditions. Inspired by such triage rules, we introduce social welfare functions whose distributive tradeoffs depend on the prevailing level of aggregate welfare. These functions are inherently self-referential: they take the welfare level as an input, even though that level is itself determined by the function. In our formulation, inequality aversion varies with welfare and is therefore self-referential. We provide an axiomatic foundation for a family of social welfare functions that move from Rawlsian to utilitarian criteria as overall welfare falls, thereby formalizing triage guidelines. We also derive the converse case, in which the social objective shifts from Rawlsianism toward utilitarianism as welfare increases.

2026-01-29T19:16:23Z Federico Echenique Teddy Mekonnen M. Bumin Yenmez http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.10966v1 2026-02-11T15:59:42Z

Finding, counting, or determining the existence of Nash equilibria, where players must play optimally given each others' actions, are known to be computational intractable problems. We ask whether weakening optimality to the requirement that each player merely avoid worst responses -- arguably the weakest meaningful rationality criterion -- yields tractable solution concepts. We show that it does not: any solution concept with this minimal guarantee is ``as intractable'' as pure Nash equilibrium. In general games, determining the existence of no-worst-response action profiles is NP-complete, finding one is NP-hard, and counting them is #P-complete. In potential games, where existence is guaranteed, the search problem is PLS-complete. Computational intractability therefore stems not only from the requirement of optimality, but also from the requirement of a minimal rationality guarantee for each player. Moreover, relaxing the latter requirement gives rise to a tractability trade-off between the strength of individual rationality guarantees and the fraction of players satisfying them.

2026-02-11T15:59:42Z 28 pages, 2 figures Mete Şeref Ahunbay Paul W. Goldberg Edwin Lock Panayotis Mertikopoulos Bary S. R. Pradelski Bassel Tarbush http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.01985v2 2026-02-11T15:33:25Z

We develop a framework for horizontal differentiation in which firms compete on a product manifold representing the feasible combinations of characteristics. This approach generalizes both the Hotelling line and Salop circle to any Riemannian space, allowing for a unified analysis of product space. We show that equilibrium existence and stability are governed by intrinsic geometric properties, specifically curvature, symmetry and dimension. We prove that negative curvature and high intrinsic dimension act as stabilizers of minimum differentiation equilibria, moving the analysis beyond the symmetry-induced instabilities found in simpler, fixed domains. By characterizing curvature as a measure of consumer heterogeneity, we demonstrate that intrinsic geometry is a fundamental determinant of competitive outcomes.

2025-06-27T13:04:08Z 44 pages, 8 figures, 6 appendices Aldric Labarthe Yann Kerzreho http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.20880v3 2026-02-11T14:50:05Z

In repeated games, such as auctions, players rely on autonomous learning agents to choose their actions. We study settings in which players have their agents make monetary transfers to other agents during play at their own expense, in order to influence learning dynamics in their favor. Our goal is to understand when players have incentives to use such payments, how payments between agents affect learning outcomes, and what the resulting implications are for welfare and its distribution. We propose a simple game-theoretic model to capture the incentive structure of such scenarios. We find that, quite generally, abstaining from payments is not robust to strategic deviations by users of learning agents: self-interested players benefit from having their agents make payments to other learners. In a broad class of games, such endogenous payments between learning agents lead to higher welfare for all players. In first- and second-price auctions, equilibria of the induced "payment-policy game" lead to highly collusive learning outcomes, with low or vanishing revenue for the auctioneer. These results highlight a fundamental challenge for mechanism design, as well as for regulatory policies, in environments where learning agents may interact in the digital ecosystem beyond a mechanism's boundaries.

2024-05-31T14:55:11Z Yoav Kolumbus Joe Halpern Éva Tardos http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.09569v3 2026-02-11T14:43:49Z

We study finite normal-form games in which payoffs are subject to random perturbations and players face uncertainty about how these shocks co-move across actions, an ambiguity that naturally arises when only realized (not counterfactual) payoffs are observed. We introduce the Statistical Equilibrium of Optimistic Beliefs (SE-OB), inspired by discrete choice theory. We model players as \textit{optimistic better responders}: they face ambiguity about the dependence structure (copula) of payoff perturbations across actions and resolve this ambiguity by selecting, from a belief set, the joint distribution that maximizes the expected value of the best perturbed payoff. Given this optimistic belief, players choose actions according to the induced random-utility choice rule. We define SE-OB as a fixed point of this two-step response mapping. SE-OB generalizes the Nash equilibrium and the structural quantal response equilibrium. We establish existence under standard regularity conditions on belief sets. For the economically important class of marginal belief sets, that is, the set of all joint distributions with fixed action-wise marginals, optimistic belief selection reduces to an optimal coupling problem, and SE-OB admits a characterization via Nash equilibrium of a smooth regularized game, yielding tractability and enabling computation. We characterize the relationship between SE-OB and existing equilibrium notions and illustrate its empirical relevance in simulations, where it captures systematic violations of independence of irrelevant alternatives that standard logit-based models fail to explain.

2025-02-13T18:25:20Z Yu Gui Bahar Taşkesen http://arxiv.org/abs/2208.03737v6 2026-02-11T14:37:28Z

This paper develops a framework to study the statistical power of revealed-preference tests. With randomly sampled budgets and mild smoothness of demand, statistical learning implies that any model consistent with the data must approximate true choice behaviour. We interpret this result as follows: passing a revealed-preference test is informative only to the extent that the data are sufficiently rich to rule out economically meaningful departures from the maintained model. We make this precise by linking sample size and confidence to the magnitude of detectable departures, and by characterising how power rises with additional observations. Extending our approach beyond revealed-preference inequalities to smooth functional restrictions yields practical tests, even when exact revealed-preference tests are computationally infeasible. We also provide confidence intervals for smooth functionals of demand, including welfare effects. Simulations show that standard sample sizes can generate widely different power across models, contextualizing why some conditions ``rarely reject'' in practice.

2022-08-07T14:29:18Z Charles Gauthier Raghav Malhotra Agustin Troccoli Moretti http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.10821v1 2026-02-11T13:03:38Z

A principal delegates choice to an agent whose decision depends on both beliefs and tastes. The principal can steer the delegated decision using two costly instruments: (i) an information policy that determines a Bayes--plausible distribution of posteriors, and (ii) a bias-management policy that shifts the agent's effective taste. We study a binary-state, two-action, convex hull of two benchmark tastes specialization with posterior-separable information costs. The analysis admits an inner--outer decomposition: optimal bias management is bang--bang (either no intervention or the minimal intervention needed to flip the agent's action), while the optimal information policy is characterized by concavification of an endogenous posterior value function that already incorporates optimal management and information costs. This structure clarifies how information acquisition and bias management interact; they can be complements, substitutes, or both depending on the primitives of the model. Information changes which posteriors are realized and hence where management is used; management reshapes the curvature and kinks of the posterior value function and hence the marginal value of information. The model delivers regime classifications for pooling vs. informativeness and for management at different posteriors within informative signals, and highlights how comparative statics can be monotone or non-monotone depending on how concavification contact points move with costs.

2026-02-11T13:03:38Z Kemal Ozbek http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.10756v1 2026-02-11T11:38:38Z

We study identification in models of aggregate choice generated by unobserved behavioral types. An analyst observes only aggregate choice behavior, while the population distribution of types and their type-level choice patterns are latent. Assuming only minimal and purely qualitative prior knowledge of the process generating type-level choice probabilities, we characterize necessary and sufficient conditions for identifiability. Identification obtains if and only if the data exhibit sufficient cross-type behavioral heterogeneity, which we characterize equivalently through combinatorial matching conditions between types and alternatives, and through algebraic properties of the matrices mapping type-level to aggregate choice behavior.

2026-02-11T11:38:38Z Christopher Kops Paola Manzini Marco Mariotti Illia Pasichnichenko http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.15048v2 2026-02-11T09:33:46Z

We study the implications of a central bank digital currency (CBDC) for the transmission of household preference shocks and for welfare in a New Keynesian framework where the CBDC competes with bank deposits for household resources and banks have market power. We show that an increase in the perceived benefit of CBDC has a mildly expansionary effect, weakening bank market power and significantly reducing the deposit spread. As households economize on liquid asset holdings, they reduce both CBDC and deposit balances. However, the degree of bank disintermediation is low, as deposit outflows remain modest. We then examine the welfare implications of CBDC rate setting and find that, compared to a non-interest-bearing CBDC, the gains with standard coefficients for a CBDC interest rate Taylor rule are modest, but they become considerable when the coefficients are optimized. Welfare gains increase with the CBDC benefit, and the optimal policy responses vary with the banking market structure.

2025-07-20T17:05:43Z 36 pages, 5 figures Hanfeng Chen Maria Elena Filippin http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.10679v1 2026-02-11T09:24:17Z

In a typical school choice application, the students have strict preferences over the schools while the schools have coarse priorities over the students based on their distance and their enrolled siblings. The outcome of a centralized admission mechanism is then usually obtained by the Deferred Acceptance (DA) algorithm with random tie-breaking. Therefore, every possible outcome of this mechanism is a stable solution for the coarse priorities that will arise with certain probability. This implies a probabilistic assignment, where the admission probability for each student-school pair is specified. In this paper, we propose a new efficiency-improving stable `smart lottery' mechanism. We aim to improve the probabilistic assignment ex-ante in a stochastic dominance sense, while ensuring that the improved random matching is still ex-post stable, meaning that it can be decomposed into stable matchings regarding the original coarse priorities. Therefore, this smart lottery mechanism can provide a clear Pareto-improvement in expectation for any cardinal utilities compared to the standard DA with lottery solution, without sacrificing the stability of the final outcome. We show that although the underlying computational problem is NP-hard, we can solve the problem by using advanced optimization techniques such as integer programming with column generation. We conduct computational experiments on generated and real instances. Our results show that the welfare gains by our mechanism are substantially larger than the expected gains by standard methods that realize efficiency improvements after ties have already been broken.

2026-02-11T09:24:17Z Haris Aziz Péter Biró Gergely Csáji Tom Demeulemeester http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.10474v1 2026-02-11T03:26:51Z

Belief elicitation is ubiquitous in experiments but can distort behavior in the main tasks. We study when, and how, an experimenter can ask for a series of action-dependent belief statistics after a subject chooses an action, while incentivize truthful reports without distorting the subject's optimal action in the main experimental tasks. We first propose a novel mechanism called the Counterfactual Scoring Rule (CSR), which achieves such nondistortionary elicitation of any single belief statistic by decomposing it into supplemental action-independent statistics. In contrast, when eliciting a fixed set of belief statistics without such decomposition, we show that robust nondistortionary elicitation is achievable if and only if the questions satisfy a joint alignment condition with the task payoff. The necessity of joint alignment is established through a graph theoretical approach, while its sufficiency follows from invoking an adaptation of the Becker-DeGroot-Marschak mechanism. Our characterization applies to experiments with general task-payoff structures and belief elicitation questions.

2026-02-11T03:26:51Z Yi-Chun Chen Ruoyu Wang Xinhan Zhang