2018
DOI: 10.1287/moor.2017.0921
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Location Games on Networks: Existence and Efficiency of Equilibria

Abstract: We consider a game where a finite number of retailers choose a location, given that their potential consumers are distributed on a network. Retailers do not compete on price but only on location, therefore each consumer shops at the closest store. We show that when the number of retailers is large enough, the game admits a pure Nash equilibrium and we construct it. We then compare the equilibrium cost borne by the consumers with the cost that could be achieved if the retailers followed the dictate of a benevol… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Hotelling-Downs model was also analyzed for non-linear markets, e.g., on graphs [29,19,18], fixed locations on a circle [33], finite sets of locations [26,27], and optimal interval division [35]. Moreover, many facility location games are variants of the Hotelling-Downs model and there is a rich body of work analyzing competitive facility location in the noncooperative setting, e.g.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The Hotelling-Downs model was also analyzed for non-linear markets, e.g., on graphs [29,19,18], fixed locations on a circle [33], finite sets of locations [26,27], and optimal interval division [35]. Moreover, many facility location games are variants of the Hotelling-Downs model and there is a rich body of work analyzing competitive facility location in the noncooperative setting, e.g.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The social costs SC(s, f) of a strategy profile (s, f) is defined as the sum over the costs of all client agents, i.e., SC(s, f) = Z C z (s, f)dz. Similarly to the Price of Anarchy, we define the quality Q of an equilibrium as in [19]. We are interested in the costs of the client players, while the strategies of the facility players define the stable states.…”
Section: Quality Of the ρ-Spementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The smaller the PoA (PoS), the fairer the worst (best) equilibrium. We are not the first to use social cost functions that are not the sum of individual costs (see for instance Fournier and Scarsini, 2019, Koutsoupias and Papadimitriou, 2009, 1999, Mavronicolas et al, 2008, Vetta, 2002.…”
Section: Fairness Of Equilibriamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since our buckpassing game is a constant-sum game, using this social cost produces only trivial results. Other social cost functions were considered, for instance, in Papadimitriou (2009, 1999), Vetta (2002), Mavronicolas et al (2008), Fournier and Scarsini (2019).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [127], the framework of potential games was exploited to analyze several applications like congestion games. In more recent works [86,97,90,107], the authors considered more involved, yet specific, games of which they carried out a complete characterization. Almost all these classical results, rely on the assumption that the players' actions can be represented by a scalar and that no complex coupling constraints among players are present.…”
Section: Introduction To Multi-agent Network Gamesmentioning
confidence: 99%