Lipschitz Continuous Allocations for Optimization Games

Authors Soh Kumabe, Yuichi Yoshida

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.82 MB
  • 16 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Soh Kumabe
  • CyberAgent, Tokyo, Japan
Yuichi Yoshida
  • National Institute of Informatics, Tokyo, Japan

Cite AsGet BibTex

Soh Kumabe and Yuichi Yoshida. Lipschitz Continuous Allocations for Optimization Games. In 51st International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 297, pp. 102:1-102:16, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)


In cooperative game theory, the primary focus is the equitable allocation of payoffs or costs among agents. However, in the practical applications of cooperative games, accurately representing games is challenging. In such cases, using an allocation method sensitive to small perturbations in the game can lead to various problems, including dissatisfaction among agents and the potential for manipulation by agents seeking to maximize their own benefits. Therefore, the allocation method must be robust against game perturbations. In this study, we explore optimization games, in which the value of the characteristic function is provided as the optimal value of an optimization problem. To assess the robustness of the allocation methods, we use the Lipschitz constant, which quantifies the extent of change in the allocation vector in response to a unit perturbation in the weight vector of the underlying problem. Thereafter, we provide an algorithm for the matching game that returns an allocation belonging to the (1/2-ε)-approximate core with Lipschitz constant O(ε^{-1}). Additionally, we provide an algorithm for a minimum spanning tree game that returns an allocation belonging to the 4-approximate core with a constant Lipschitz constant. The Shapley value is a popular allocation that satisfies several desirable properties. Therefore, we investigate the robustness of the Shapley value. We demonstrate that the Lipschitz constant of the Shapley value for the minimum spanning tree is constant, whereas that for the matching game is Ω(log n), where n denotes the number of vertices.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Mathematics of computing → Approximation algorithms
  • Cooperative Games
  • Lipschitz Continuity


  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    PDF Downloads


  1. Kazutoshi Ando. Computation of the shapley value of minimum cost spanning tree games: #P-hardness and polynomial cases. Japan Journal of Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 29(3):385-400, 2012. Google Scholar
  2. Haris Aziz and Bart de Keijzer. Shapley meets shapley. arXiv preprint, 2013. URL:
  3. Márton Benedek, Péter Biró, Matthew Johnson, Daniël Paulusma, and Xin Ye. The complexity of matching games: A survey. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 77:459-485, 2023. Google Scholar
  4. Charles G Bird. On cost allocation for a spanning tree: a game theoretic approach. Networks, 6(4):335-350, 1976. Google Scholar
  5. Péter Biró, Walter Kern, Daniël Paulusma, and Péter Wojuteczky. The stable fixtures problem with payments. Games and economic behavior, 108:245-268, 2018. Google Scholar
  6. Armin Claus and Daniel J Kleitman. Cost allocation for a spanning tree. Networks, 3(4):289-304, 1973. Google Scholar
  7. Vincent Conitzer and Tuomas Sandholm. Complexity of constructing solutions in the core based on synergies among coalitions. Artificial Intelligence, 170(6-7):607-619, 2006. Google Scholar
  8. Xiaotie Deng, Toshihide Ibaraki, and Hiroshi Nagamochi. Algorithmic aspects of the core of combinatorial optimization games. Mathematics of Operations Research, 24(3):751-766, 1999. Google Scholar
  9. Kimmo Eriksson and Johan Karlander. Stable outcomes of the roommate game with transferable utility. International Journal of Game Theory, 29:555-569, 2001. Google Scholar
  10. Ulrich Faigle, Sándor P Fekete, Winfried Hochstättler, and Walter Kern. On approximately fair cost allocation in euclidean tsp games. Operations-Research-Spektrum, 20:29-37, 1998. Google Scholar
  11. Ulrich Faigle and Walter Kern. On some approximately balanced combinatorial cooperative games. Zeitschrift für Operations Research, 38:141-152, 1993. Google Scholar
  12. Ulrich Faigle and Walter Kern. Approximate core allocation for binpacking games. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, 11(3):387-399, 1998. Google Scholar
  13. Ulrich Faigle, Walter Kern, Sándor P Fekete, and Winfried Hochstättler. On the complexity of testing membership in the core of min-cost spanning tree games. International Journal of Game Theory, 26:361-366, 1997. Google Scholar
  14. Daniel Granot and Gur Huberman. Minimum cost spanning tree games. Mathematical programming, 21:1-18, 1981. Google Scholar
  15. Satoshi Hara and Yuichi Yoshida. Average sensitivity of decision tree learning. In The 11th International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2023. Google Scholar
  16. Sergiu Hart. Shapley value. In Game theory, pages 210-216. Springer, 1989. Google Scholar
  17. Walter Kern and Xian Qiu. Integrality gap analysis for bin packing games. Operations Research Letters, 40(5):360-363, 2012. Google Scholar
  18. Jeroen Kuipers. Bin packing games. Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, 47:499-510, 1998. Google Scholar
  19. Soh Kumabe and Takanori Maehara. Convexity of b-matching games. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 261-267, 2020. Google Scholar
  20. Soh Kumabe and Takanori Maehara. Convexity of hypergraph matching game. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems (AAMAS), pages 663-671, 2020. Google Scholar
  21. Soh Kumabe and Yuichi Yoshida. Average sensitivity of dynamic programming. In Proceedings of the 33th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 1925-1961, 2022. Google Scholar
  22. Soh Kumabe and Yuichi Yoshida. Lipschitz continuous algorithms for covering problems. arXiv preprint, 2023. URL:
  23. Soh Kumabe and Yuichi Yoshida. Lipschitz continuous algorithms for graph problems. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE 64th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pages 762-797. IEEE, 2023. Google Scholar
  24. Tianhang Lu, Han Xiao, and Qizhi Fang. Approximate core allocations for edge cover games. In International Workshop on Frontiers in Algorithmics, pages 105-115. Springer, 2023. Google Scholar
  25. Pan Peng and Yuichi Yoshida. Average sensitivity of spectral clustering. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining (KDD), pages 1132-1140, 2020. Google Scholar
  26. Xian Qiu and Walter Kern. Approximate core allocations and integrality gap for the bin packing game. Theoretical Computer Science, 627:26-35, 2016. Google Scholar
  27. Lloyd S Shapley. On Balanced Sets and Cores. RAND Corporation, 1965. Google Scholar
  28. Lloyd S Shapley and Martin Shubik. Quasi-cores in a monetary economy with nonconvex preferences. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, pages 805-827, 1966. Google Scholar
  29. Lloyd S Shapley and Martin Shubik. The assignment game I: The core. International Journal of Game Theory, 1:111-130, 1971. Google Scholar
  30. Marilda Sotomayor. The multiple partners game. In Equilibrium and Dynamics: Essays in Honour of David Gale, pages 322-354. Springer, 1992. Google Scholar
  31. Nithin Varma and Yuichi Yoshida. Average sensitivity of graph algorithms. SIAM Journal on Computing, 52(4):1039-1081, 2023. Google Scholar
  32. Vijay V Vazirani. The general graph matching game: Approximate core. Games and Economic Behavior, 132:478-486, 2022. Google Scholar
  33. Gerhard J Woeginger. On the rate of taxation in a cooperative bin packing game. Zeitschrift für Operations Research, 42:313-324, 1995. Google Scholar
  34. Han Xiao, Tianhang Lu, and Qizhi Fang. Approximate core allocations for multiple partners matching games. arXiv preprint, 2021. URL:
  35. Yuichi Yoshida and Shinji Ito. Average sensitivity of Euclidean k-clustering. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2022. Google Scholar