Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
97 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
53 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Equilibria in Two-Stage Facility Location with Atomic Clients (2403.03114v2)

Published 5 Mar 2024 in cs.GT and cs.AI

Abstract: We consider competitive facility location as a two-stage multi-agent system with two types of clients. For a given host graph with weighted clients on the vertices, first facility agents strategically select vertices for opening their facilities. Then, the clients strategically select which of the opened facilities in their neighborhood to patronize. Facilities want to attract as much client weight as possible, clients want to minimize congestion on the chosen facility. All recently studied versions of this model assume that clients can split their weight strategically. We consider clients with unsplittable weights but allow mixed strategies. So clients may randomize over which facility to patronize. Besides modeling a natural client behavior, this subtle change yields drastic changes, e.g., for a given facility placement, qualitatively different client equilibria are possible. As our main result, we show that pure subgame perfect equilibria always exist if all client weights are identical. For this, we use a novel potential function argument, employing a hierarchical classification of the clients and sophisticated rounding in each step. In contrast, for non-identical clients, we show that deciding the existence of even approximately stable states is computationally intractable. On the positive side, we give a tight bound of $2$ on the price of anarchy which implies high social welfare of equilibria, if they exist.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (32)
  1. Competitive facility location: the Voronoi game. Theor. Comput. Sci. 310, 1-3 (2004), 457–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2003.09.004
  2. Steffen Brenner. 2011. Location (Hotelling) Games and Applications. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470400531.eorms0477
  3. Jean Cardinal and Martin Hoefer. 2010. Non-cooperative facility location and covering games. Theor. Comput. Sci. 411, 16-18 (2010), 1855–1876. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TCS.2010.02.005
  4. Mechanism Design for Facility Location Problems: A Survey. In IJCAI. 4356–4365. https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2021/596
  5. Avi Cohen and David Peleg. 2019. Hotelling Games with Random Tolerance Intervals. In WINE. 114–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35389-6_9
  6. The uncapicitated facility location problem. Technical Report. Cornell University Operations Research and Industrial Engineering. https://hdl.handle.net/1813/8491
  7. Heterogeneous Facility Location with Limited Resources. In AAAI. 4966–4974. https://doi.org/10.1609/AAAI.V36I5.20427
  8. Anthony Downs. 1957. An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy. Journal of Political Economy 65, 2 (1957), 135–150. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1827369
  9. Christoph Dürr and Kim Thang Nguyen. 2007. Nash Equilibria in Voronoi Games on Graphs. In ESA. 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75520-3_4
  10. Competitive location models: A framework and bibliography. Transportation Science 27, 1 (1993), 44–54. https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.27.1.44
  11. Variations on the Hotelling-Downs Model. In AAAI. 496–501. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v30i1.10054
  12. From Hotelling to Load Balancing: Approximation and the Principle of Minimum Differentiation. In AAMAS. 1949–1951. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3306127.3331973
  13. The structure and complexity of Nash equilibria for a selfish routing game. Theor. Comput. Sci. 410, 36 (2009), 3305–3326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2008.01.004
  14. Gaëtan Fournier. 2019. General distribution of consumers in pure Hotelling games. Int. J. Game Theory 48, 1 (2019), 33–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00182-018-0648-4
  15. Gaëtan Fournier and Marco Scarsini. 2019. Location Games on Networks: Existence and Efficiency of Equilibria. Math. Oper. Res. 44, 1 (2019), 212–235. https://doi.org/10.1287/MOOR.2017.0921
  16. Harold N. Gabow and Robert E. Tarjan. 1989. Faster Scaling Algorithms for Network Problems. SIAM J. Computing 18, 5 (1989), 1013–1036. https://doi.org/10.1137/0218069
  17. Harold Hotelling. 1929. Stability in Competition. The Economic Journal 39, 153 (1929), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.2307/2224214
  18. On Discrete Truthful Heterogeneous Two-Facility Location. In IJCAI. 342–348. https://doi.org/10.24963/IJCAI.2022/49
  19. Elon Kohlberg. 1983. Equilibrium store locations when consumers minimize travel time plus waiting time. Economics Letters 11, 3 (1983), 211 – 216. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1765(83)90137-4
  20. Bernhard Korte and Jens Vygen. 2006. Combinatorial Optimization: Theory and Algorithms. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-56039-6
  21. Elias Koutsoupias and Christos Papadimitriou. 1999. Worst-Case Equilibria. In STACS. 404–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49116-3_38
  22. Two-Stage Facility Location Games with Strategic Clients and Facilities. In IJCAI. 292–298. https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2021/41
  23. Strategic Facility Location with Clients That Minimize Total Waiting Time. In AAAI, Vol. 37. 5714–5721. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v37i5.25709
  24. Facility Location Games with Entrance Fees. In AAAI. 5797–5804. https://doi.org/10.1609/AAAI.V37I5.25719
  25. Denes Pálvölgyi. 2011. Hotelling on graphs. (2011). https://www.academia.edu/1087713/Hotelling_on_graphs
  26. Hotelling’s location model with negative network externalities. Int. J. Game Theory 47, 3 (2018), 811–837. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00182-018-0615-0
  27. C. S. ReVelle and H. A. Eiselt. 2005. Location analysis: A synthesis and survey. European journal of operational research 165, 1 (2005), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2003.11.032
  28. Robert W. Rosenthal. 1973. A class of games possessing pure-strategy Nash equilibria. Int. J. Game Theory 2 (1973), 65–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01737559
  29. Daniela Sabán and Nicolás Stier Moses. 2012. The Competitive Facility Location Problem in a Duopoly: Connections to the 1-Median Problem. In WINE. 539–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35311-6_44
  30. Weiran Shen and Zihe Wang. 2017. Hotelling-Downs Model with Limited Attraction. In AAMAS. 660–668. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3091125.3091220
  31. Adrian Vetta. 2002. Nash Equilibria in Competitive Societies, with Applications to Facility Location, Traffic Routing and Auctions. FOCS (2002), 416–425. https://doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.2002.1181966
  32. Toby Walsh. 2022. Strategy Proof Mechanisms for Facility Location with Capacity Limits. In IJCAI. 527–533. https://doi.org/10.24963/IJCAI.2022/75
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (5)
  1. Simon Krogmann (9 papers)
  2. Pascal Lenzner (39 papers)
  3. Alexander Skopalik (24 papers)
  4. Marc Uetz (9 papers)
  5. Marnix C. Vos (1 paper)
Citations (1)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.