Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2505.14817

Cooperative Bargaining Games Without Utilities: Mediated Solutions from Direction Oracles

Abstract

Cooperative bargaining games are widely used to model resource allocation and conflict resolution. Traditional solutions assume the mediator can access agents utility function values and gradients. However, there is an increasing number of settings, such as human AI interactions, where utility values may be inaccessible or incomparable due to unknown, nonaffine transformations. To model such settings, we consider that the mediator has access only to agents most preferred directions, i.e., normalized utility gradients in the decision space. To this end, we propose a cooperative bargaining algorithm where a mediator has access to only the direction oracle of each agent. We prove that unlike popular approaches such as the Nash and Kalai Smorodinsky bargaining solutions, our approach is invariant to monotonic nonaffine transformations, and that under strong convexity and smoothness assumptions, this approach enjoys global asymptotic convergence to Pareto stationary solutions. Moreover, we show that the bargaining solutions found by our algorithm also satisfy the axioms of symmetry and (under slightly stronger conditions) independence of irrelevant alternatives, which are popular in the literature. Finally, we conduct experiments in two domains, multi agent formation assignment and mediated stock portfolio allocation, which validate these theoretic results. All code for our experiments can be found at https://github.com/suryakmurthy/dibs_bargaining.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kushagra Gupta, Surya Murthy, Mustafa O. Karabag, Ufuk Topcu, David Fridovich-Keil. 2025-10-16. Cooperative Bargaining Games Without Utilities: Mediated Solutions from Direction Oracles. https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.14817

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Learning in Structured Stackelberg Games

We initiate the study of structured Stackelberg games, a novel form of strategic interaction between a leader and a follower where contextual information can be predictive of the follower's (unknown) type. Motivated by applications such as security games and AI safety, we show how this additional structure can help the leader learn a utility-maximizing policy in both the online and distributional settings. In the online setting, we first prove that standard learning-theoretic measures of complexity do not characterize the difficulty of the leader's learning task. Notably, we find that there exists a learning-theoretic measure of complexity, analogous to the Littlestone dimension in online classification, that tightly characterizes the leader's instance-optimal regret. We term this the Stackelberg-Littlestone dimension, and leverage it to provide a provably optimal online learning algorithm. In the distributional setting, we provide analogous results by showing that two new dimensions control the sample complexity upper- and lower-bound.

cs.GT

Equilibrium and Infeasibility: A new solution concept for games

Addressing infeasibility in non-cooperative games has become an important topic, as many problems across different applications face this issue. In this paper, we propose a new solution concept for generalized games with possibly infeasible individual constraints. A solution is defined as the limit of a sequence of generalized Nash equilibria induced by games with penalty terms relaxing the individual constraints. Existence is established for a broad range of games and we provide conditions allowing to characterize a $ψ$-penalized solution as a strategy profile maximizing every player's utility over all her penalty minimizing strategies. A variation of Divide-the-Dollar serves as an illustrative example. We further establish the compatibility with the GNE and the solution to the Nash bargaining.

cs.GT

Subgame-Perfect Nash Equilibria of Plurality Voting with Abstention: a PSPACE-Completeness Result for Restricted Ballots

We consider sequential Plurality elections in which each voter may abstain or vote for a single candidate. Each voter assigns utilities to all candidates; for each voter, this induces a (weak) order over the candidates. Ties are resolved uniformly at random, and voting has a small positive cost, so that a voter prefers to abstain when their vote cannot change the election outcome. We consider a variant of this model where, for each voter, we additionally specify a prefix of her ranking, so that she is only allowed to vote for a candidate from that prefix (or abstain). We prove that for this variant of the model, deciding whether a designated candidate is among the election winners in a subgame-perfect equilibrium of the associated extensive-form game is PSPACE-complete. This partially resolves an open problem from the work of Desmedt and Elkind [2010].

cs.GT