skip to main content
research-article

Altruism and Its Impact on the Price of Anarchy

Published:28 October 2014Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We study the inefficiency of equilibria for congestion games when players are (partially) altruistic. We model altruistic behavior by assuming that player i's perceived cost is a convex combination of αi times his direct cost and αi times the social cost. Tuning the parameters αi allows smooth interpolation between purely selfish and purely altruistic behavior. Within this framework, we study primarily altruistic extensions of (atomic and nonatomic) congestion games, but also obtain some results on fair cost-sharing games and valid utility games.

We derive (tight) bounds on the price of anarchy of these games for several solution concepts. Thereto, we suitably adapt the smoothness notion introduced by Roughgarden and show that it captures the essential properties to determine the robust price of anarchy of these games. Our bounds show that for atomic congestion games and cost-sharing games, the robust price of anarchy gets worse with increasing altruism, while for valid utility games, it remains constant and is not affected by altruism.

However, the increase in the price of anarchy is not a universal phenomenon: For general nonatomic congestion games with uniform altruism, the price of anarchy improves with increasing altruism. For atomic and nonatomic symmetric singleton congestion games, we derive bounds on the pure price of anarchy that improve as the average level of altruism increases. (For atomic games, we only derive such bounds when cost functions are linear.) Since the bounds are also strictly lower than the robust price of anarchy, these games exhibit natural examples in which pure Nash equilibria are more efficient than more permissive notions of equilibrium.

References

  1. H. Ackermann, H. Röglin, and B. Vöcking. 2006. Pure Nash equilibria in player-specific and weighted congestion games. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Internet and Network Economics. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. A. Anagnostopoulos, L. Becchetti, B. De Keijzer, and G. Schäfer. 2013. Inefficiency of games with social context. In Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Algorithmic Game Theory.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. E. Anshelevich, O. Bhardwaj, and M. Hoefer. 2012. Friendship, altruism, and reward sharing in stable matching and contribution games. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.5780.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. E. Anshelevich, A. Dasgupta, J. Kleinberg, E. Tardos, T. Wexler, and T. Roughgarden. 2004. The price of stability for network design with fair cost allocation. In Proceedings of the 45th Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. V. Arya, N. Garg, R. Khandekar, A. Meyerson, K. Munagala, and V. Pandit. 2004. Local search heuristics for K-median and facility location problems. SIAM J. Comput. 33, 3. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. R. J. Aumann. 1974. Subjectivity and correlation in randomized strategies. J. Math. Econ. 1, 1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. B. Awerbuch, Y. Azar, and A. Epstein. 2005. Large the price of routing unsplittable flow. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. M. Babaioff, R. Kleinberg, and C. H. Papadimitriou. 2009. Congestion games with malicious players. Games Econ. Behav. 67, 1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. T. Bergstrom. 1999. Systems of benevolent utility functions. J. Public Econ. Theory 1, 1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Vittorio Bilò, Alessandro Celi, Michele Flammini, and Vasco Gallotti. 2013. Social context congestion games. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 514, 21--35. (Graph Algorithms and Applications: in Honor of Professor Giorgio Ausiello.) Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. A. Blum, E. Even-Dar, and K. Ligett. 2006. Routing without regret: On convergence to Nash equilibria of regret-minimizing algorithms in routing games. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. A. Blum, M. T. Hajiaghayi, K. Ligett, and A. Roth. 2008. Regret minimization and the price of total anarchy. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. V. Bonifaci, T. Harks, and G. Schäfer. 2007. The impact of stackelberg routing in general networks. Tech. Rep. COGA Preprint 020-2007, TU Berlin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. M. Bradonjic, G. Ercal-Ozkaya, A. Meyerson, and A. Roytman. 2009. On the price of mediation. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. F. Brandt, T. Sandholm, and Y. Shoham. 2007. Spiteful bidding in sealed-bid auctions. In Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artifical Intelligence. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. R. Buehler, Z. Goldman, D. Liben-Nowell, Y. Pei, J. Quadri, A. Sharp, S. Taggart, T. Wexler, and K. Woods. 2011. The price of civil society. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Internet and Network Economics. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. I. Caragiannis, C. Kaklamanis, P. Kanellopoulos, M. Kyropoulou, and E. Papaioannou. 2010. The impact of altruism on the efficiency of atomic congestion games. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Trustworthy Global Computing. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. G. Charness and M. Rabin. 2002. Understanding social preferences with simple tests. Quart. J. Econ. 117.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. P.-A. Chen, M. David, and D. Kempe. 2010. Better vaccination strategies for better people. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. P.-A. Chen, B. de Keijzer, D. Kempe, and G. Schäfer. 2011. The robust price of anarchy of altruistic games. In Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Internet & Network Economics. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. P.-A. Chen and D. Kempe. 2008. Altruism, selfishness, and spite in traffic routing. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. X. Chen and X. Deng. 2006. Settling the complexity of two-player Nash-equilibrium. In Proceedings of the 47rd Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. G. Christodoulou and E. Koutsoupias. 2005. The price of anarchy of finite congestion games. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. R. Cole, Y. Dodis, and T. Roughgarden. 2003. Pricing network edges for heterogeneous selfish users. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. R. Cole, Y. Dodis, and T. Roughgarden. 2006. How much can taxes help selfish routing? J. Comput. System Sci. 72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. S. Dafermos. 1972. The traffic assignment problem for multiclass-user transportation networks. Transport. Sci. 6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. J. Elias, F. Martignon, K. Avrachenkov, and G. Neglia. 2010. Socially-aware network design games. In Proceedings of the INFOCOM'10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. E. Fehr and K. M. Schmidt. 2005. The economics of fairness, reciprocity and altruism — Experimental evidence and new theories. Tech. Rep. Discussion Paper No. 2005-20, Department of Economics, Universität München.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. A. Fiat, A. Karlin, E. Koutsoupias, and A. Vidali. 2013. Approaching utopia: Strong truthfulness and externality-resistant mechanisms. In Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. J. Geanakoplos, D. Pearce, and E. Stacchetti. 1989. Psychological games and sequential rationality. Games Econ. Behav. 1, 1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. H. Gintis, S. Bowles, R. Boyd, and E. Fehr. 2005. Moral Sentiments and Material Interests: The Foundations of Cooperation in Economic Life. MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. W. D. Hamilton. 1963. The evolution of altruistic behavior. Amer. Natural. 97.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. W. D. Hamilton. 1964. The genetical evolution of social behavior, I&II. J. Theoret. Biol. 7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. J. Hannan. 1957. Approximation to Bayes risk in repeated plays. Contrib. Theory Games 3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. A. Hayrapetyan, E. Tardos, and T. Wexler. 2006. The effect of collusion in congestion games. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. M. Hoefer and A. Skopalik. 2009a. Altruism in atomic congestion games. In Proceedings of the 17th European Symposium on Algorithms.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. M. Hoefer and A. Skopalik. 2009b. Stability and convergence in selfish scheduling with altruistic agents. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Internet and Network Economics. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. P. Hui, K. Xu, V. O. K. Li, J. Crowcroft, V. Latora, and P. Lio. 2009a. Impact of altruism on opportunistic communications. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Ubiquitous and Future Networks. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. P. Hui, K. Xu, V. O. K. Li, J. Crowcroft, V. Latora, and P. Lio. 2009b. Selfishness, altruism and message spreading in mobile social networks. In Proceedings of the INFOCOM'09 Workshop. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. G. Karakostas and A. Viglas. 2007. Equilibria for networks with malicious users. Math. Program. 110. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. E. Koutsoupias and C. Papadimitriou. 1999. Worst-case equilibria. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. J. Ledyard. 1997. Public goods: A survey of experimental resesarch. In Handbook of Experimental Economics, J. Kagel and A. Roth (Eds.), Princeton University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. D. K. Levine. 1998. Modeling altruism and spitefulness in experiments. Rev. Econ. Dynam. 1, 3 (July 1998).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. T. Lücking, M. Mavronicolas, B. Monien, and M. Rode. 2008. A new model for selfish routing. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 406 (October 2008). Issue 3. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. A. Mas-Colell. 1984. On a theorem of Schmeidler. J. Math. Econ. 13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. D. Meier, Y. A. Oswald, S. Schmid, and R. Wattenhofer. 2008. On the windfall of friendship: Inoculation strategies on social networks. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. I. Milchtaich. 1996. Congestion games with player-specific payoff functions. Games Econ. Behav. 13, 1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. I. Milchtaich. 2012. Comparative statics of altruism and spite. Games Econ. Behav. 75, 2.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. T. Moscibroda, S. Schmid, and R. Wattenhofer. 2006. When selfish meets evil: Byzantine players in a virus inoculation game. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. U. Nadav and T. Roughgarden. 2010. The limits of smoothness: A primal-dual framework for price of anarchy bounds. In Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Internet and Network Economics. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. N. Nisan, T. Roughgarden, É. Tardos, and V. V. Vazirani (Eds.). 2007. Algorithmic Game Theory. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. A. Pigou. 1920. The Economics of Welfare. Macmillan.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. M. Rabin. 1993. Incorporating fairness into game theory and economics. Amer. Econ. Rev. 83, 5 (December 1993).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. M. Rahn and G. Schäfer. 2013. Bounding the inefficiency of altruism through social contribution games. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Web and Internet Economics.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. R. W. Rosenthal. 1973. A class of games possessing pure-strategy Nash equilibria. Int. J. Game Theory 2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. A. Roth. 2008. The price of malice in linear congestion games. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Internet and Network Economics. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. T. Roughgarden. 2004. Stackelberg scheduling strategies. SIAM J. Comput. 33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. T. Roughgarden. 2005. Selfish Routing and the Price of Anarchy. MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. T. Roughgarden. 2009. Intrinsic robustness of the price of anarchy. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. T. Roughgarden and F. Schoppmann. 2011. Local smoothness and the price of anarchy in atomic splittable congestion games. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. T. Roughgarden and E. Tardos. 2000. How bad is selfish routing? In Proceedings of the 41st Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. M. Smith. 1979. The marginal cost taxation of a transportation network. Transport. Res. Part B, 13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. C. Swamy. 2007. The effectiveness of stackelberg strategies and tolls for network congestion games. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  64. A. Vetta. 2002. Nash equilibria in competitive societies, with applications to facility location, traffic routing and auctions. In Proceedings of the 43rd Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. S. A. West, C. El Mouden, and A. Gardner. 2011. Sixteen common misconceptions about the evolution of cooperation in humans. Evolut. Hum. Behav. 32, 4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. H. P. Young. 1995. Strategic Learning and its Limits. Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Altruism and Its Impact on the Price of Anarchy

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation
      ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation  Volume 2, Issue 4
      October 2014
      162 pages
      ISSN:2167-8375
      EISSN:2167-8383
      DOI:10.1145/2684807
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2014 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 28 October 2014
      • Accepted: 1 May 2014
      • Revised: 1 March 2014
      • Received: 1 August 2013
      Published in teac Volume 2, Issue 4

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader