Geodesic
Nash bargaining solution as negotiation concept for resource allocation problem: analysis of experimental data
Contributions to game theory and management, Tome 13 (2020), pp. 207-217.

Voir la notice de l'article provenant de la source Math-Net.Ru

Motivated by research works on Zeuthen-Hicks bargaining, which leads to the Nash bargaining solution (Vetschera, 2018), we analyze data obtained during experimental resource allocation gaming with Yang-Hajek's mechanism from the class of proportional allocation mechanisms. Games were designed in the form of negotiation to allow players to reach consensus. Behavior models based on best response, constant behavior, and Nash bargaining solution are defined. Analysis conducted over decisions made by participants shows that a significant share of all decisions leads to an increase of Nash bargaining value. It is even higher than the share of decisions that are in agreement with the best-response concept. Consensus-ended games show more but subtle attraction to Nash bargaining solution behavior. We discuss how these decisions correspond with other types of behavior actively exhibited by participants of this experiments — so-called constant behavior and with the end of negotiation process in games.
Keywords: resource allocation mechanisms, Nash implementation, Nash bargaining solution. 
@article{CGTM_2020_13_a10,
     author = {Nikolay A. Korgin and Vsevolod O. Korepanov},
     title = {Nash bargaining solution as negotiation concept for resource allocation problem: analysis of experimental data},
     journal = {Contributions to game theory and management},
     pages = {207--217},
     publisher = {mathdoc},
     volume = {13},
     year = {2020},
     language = {en},
     url = {http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/item/CGTM_2020_13_a10/}
}
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Nikolay A. Korgin
AU  - Vsevolod O. Korepanov
TI  - Nash bargaining solution as negotiation concept for resource allocation problem: analysis of experimental data
JO  - Contributions to game theory and management
PY  - 2020
SP  - 207
EP  - 217
VL  - 13
PB  - mathdoc
UR  - http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/item/CGTM_2020_13_a10/
LA  - en
ID  - CGTM_2020_13_a10
ER  - 
%0 Journal Article
%A Nikolay A. Korgin
%A Vsevolod O. Korepanov
%T Nash bargaining solution as negotiation concept for resource allocation problem: analysis of experimental data
%J Contributions to game theory and management
%D 2020
%P 207-217
%V 13
%I mathdoc
%U http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/item/CGTM_2020_13_a10/
%G en
%F CGTM_2020_13_a10
Nikolay A. Korgin; Vsevolod O. Korepanov. Nash bargaining solution as negotiation concept for resource allocation problem: analysis of experimental data. Contributions to game theory and management, Tome 13 (2020), pp. 207-217. http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/item/CGTM_2020_13_a10/

[1] Bašar T., Maheswaran R. T., “Nash equilibrium and decentralized negotiation in auctioning divisible resources”, Group Decision and Negotiation, 12:5 (2003), 361–395 | DOI

[2] Boyd S., Parikh N., Chu E., “Distributed Optimization and Statistical Learning via the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers”, Foundations and Trends in Machine Learning, 3:1 (2011), 1–122 | DOI | MR

[3] Chkhartishvili A. G., Korepanov V. O., “Adding informational beliefs to the players strategic thinking model”, IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49:32 (2016), 19–23 | DOI | MR

[4] Groves T., Ledyard J. O., “Optimal allocation of public goods: A solution to the ‘freerider’ problem”, Econometrica, 45 (1977), 783–809 | DOI | MR | Zbl

[5] Groves T., Ledyard J. O., Incentive compatibility ten years later, Discussion Papers, No 648, 1985

[6] Harsanyi J. C., “Approaches to the bargaining problem before and after the theory of games: A critical discussion of Zeuthen's, Hicks', and Nash's theories”, Econometrica, 24:2 (1956), 144–157 | DOI | MR | Zbl

[7] Korgin N., Korepanov V., “An Efficient Solution of the Resource Allotment Problem with the Groves–Ledyard Mechanism under Transferable Utility”, Automation and Remote Control, 77:5 (2016), 914–942 | DOI | MR | Zbl

[8] Korgin N., Korepanov V., “Experimental gaming comparison of resource allocation rules in case of transferable utilities”, International Game Theory Review, 19:2 (2017), 1750006 | DOI | MR | Zbl

[9] Nash J. F., “The bargaining problem”, Econometrica, 18:2 (1950), 155–162 | DOI | MR | Zbl

[10] Yang S., Hajek B., Revenue and stability of a mechanism for efficient allocation of a divisible good, mimeo, University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign, 2005, 35 pp.

[11] Vetschera R., “Zeuthen–Hicks Bargaining in Electronic Negotiations”, Group Decision and Negotiation, 28 (2018), 255–274 | DOI