Document Open Access Logo

Core Stability in Additively Separable Hedonic Games of Low Treewidth

Authors Tesshu Hanaka , Noleen Köhler , Michael Lampis

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
LIPIcs.ISAAC.2024.39.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.98 MB
  • 17 pages

Document Identifiers

Related Versions

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Mathematics of computing → Graph algorithms
  • Theory of computation → Parameterized complexity and exact algorithms
Keywords
  • Hedonic games
  • Treewidth
  • Core stability

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads
    0
    Metadata Views

Abstract

Additively Separable Hedonic Games (ASHGs) are coalition-formation games where we are given a directed graph whose vertices represent n selfish agents and the weight of each arc uv denotes the preferences from u to v. We revisit the computational complexity of the well-known notion of core stability of symmetric ASHGs, where the goal is to construct a partition of the agents into coalitions such that no group of agents would prefer to diverge from the given partition and form a new coalition. For Core Stability Verification (CSV), we first show the following hardness results: CSV remains coNP-complete on graphs of vertex cover 2; CSV is coW[1]-hard parameterized by vertex integrity when edge weights are polynomially bounded; and CSV is coW[1]-hard parameterized by tree-depth even if all weights are from {-1,1}. We complement these results with essentially matching algorithms and color{black}{an FPT algorithm parameterized by the treewidth tw plus the maximum degree Δ (improving a previous algorithm’s dependence from 2^O(twΔ²)} to 2^O(twΔ)).} We then move on to study Core Stability (CS), which one would naturally expect to be even harder than CSV. We confirm this intuition by showing that CS is Σ₂^p-complete even on graphs of bounded vertex cover number. On the positive side, we present a 2^{2^O(Δtw)}n^O(1)-time algorithm parameterized by tw+Δ, which is essentially optimal assuming Exponential Time Hypothesis (ETH). Finally, we consider the notion of k-core stability: k denotes the maximum size of the allowed blocking (diverging) coalitions. We show that k-CSV is coW[1]-hard parameterized by k (even on unweighted graphs), while k-CS is NP-complete for all k ≥ 3 (even on graphs of bounded degree with bounded edge weights).

Cite As Get BibTex

Tesshu Hanaka, Noleen Köhler, and Michael Lampis. Core Stability in Additively Separable Hedonic Games of Low Treewidth. In 35th International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation (ISAAC 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 322, pp. 39:1-39:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ISAAC.2024.39

Author Details

Tesshu Hanaka
  • Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
Noleen Köhler
  • University of Leeds, UK
Michael Lampis
  • Université Paris-Dauphine, PSL University, CNRS UMR7243, LAMSADE, Paris, France

Funding

  • Hanaka, Tesshu: Partially supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP21H05852, JP21K17707, JP22H00513, JP23H04388.
  • Köhler, Noleen: Partially supported by ANR project ANR-18-CE40-0025-01 (ASSK).
  • Lampis, Michael: Supported by ANR project ANR-21-CE48-0022 (S-EX-AP-PE-AL).

References

  1. Alessandro Aloisio, Michele Flammini, and Cosimo Vinci. The impact of selfishness in hypergraph hedonic games. In The Thirty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2020, The Thirty-Second Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, IAAI 2020, The Tenth AAAI Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial Intelligence, EAAI 2020, New York, NY, USA, February 7-12, 2020, pages 1766-1773. AAAI Press, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1609/AAAI.V34I02.5542.
  2. Haris Aziz, Florian Brandl, Felix Brandt, Paul Harrenstein, Martin Olsen, and Dominik Peters. Fractional hedonic games. ACM Trans. Economics and Comput., 7(2):6:1-6:29, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3327970.
  3. Haris Aziz, Felix Brandt, and Hans Georg Seedig. Computing desirable partitions in additively separable hedonic games. Artif. Intell., 195:316-334, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2012.09.006.
  4. Haris Aziz and Rahul Savani. Hedonic games. In Handbook of Computational Social Choice, pages 356-376. Cambridge University Press, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107446984.016.
  5. Coralio Ballester. NP-completeness in hedonic games. Games Econ. Behav., 49(1):1-30, 2004. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GEB.2003.10.003.
  6. Nathanaël Barrot, Kazunori Ota, Yuko Sakurai, and Makoto Yokoo. Unknown agents in friends oriented hedonic games: Stability and complexity. In The Thirty-Third AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2019, The Thirty-First Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, IAAI 2019, The Ninth AAAI Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial Intelligence, EAAI 2019, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, January 27 - February 1, 2019, pages 1756-1763. AAAI Press, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33011756.
  7. Nathanaël Barrot and Makoto Yokoo. Stable and envy-free partitions in hedonic games. In Sarit Kraus, editor, Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2019, Macao, China, August 10-16, 2019, pages 67-73. ijcai.org, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2019/10.
  8. Ivan Bliznets and Markus Hecher. Tight double exponential lower bounds. In Xujin Chen and Bo Li, editors, Theory and Applications of Models of Computation - 18th Annual Conference, TAMC 2024, Hong Kong, China, May 13-15, 2024, Proceedings, volume 14637 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 124-136. Springer, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-2340-9_11.
  9. Hans L Bodlaender, John R Gilbert, Hjálmtyr Hafsteinsson, and Ton Kloks. Approximating treewidth, pathwidth, frontsize, and shortest elimination tree. Journal of Algorithms, 18(2):238-255, 1995. URL: https://doi.org/10.1006/JAGM.1995.1009.
  10. Niclas Boehmer and Edith Elkind. Individual-based stability in hedonic diversity games. In The Thirty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2020, The Thirty-Second Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, IAAI 2020, The Tenth AAAI Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial Intelligence, EAAI 2020, New York, NY, USA, February 7-12, 2020, pages 1822-1829. AAAI Press, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1609/AAAI.V34I02.5549.
  11. Anna Bogomolnaia and Matthew O Jackson. The stability of hedonic coalition structures. Games and Economic Behavior, 38(2):201-230, 2002. URL: https://doi.org/10.1006/GAME.2001.0877.
  12. Felix Brandt, Martin Bullinger, and Anaëlle Wilczynski. Reaching individually stable coalition structures. ACM Trans. Economics and Comput., 11:4:1-4:65, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3588753.
  13. Martin Bullinger and Stefan Kober. Loyalty in cardinal hedonic games. In Zhi-Hua Zhou, editor, Proceedings of the Thirtieth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2021, Virtual Event / Montreal, Canada, 19-27 August 2021, pages 66-72. ijcai.org, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2021/10.
  14. Katarína Cechlárová. Stable partition problem. In Encyclopedia of Algorithms, pages 2075-2078. Springer, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2864-4_397.
  15. Hubie Chen. Quantified constraint satisfaction and bounded treewidth. In Ramón López de Mántaras and Lorenza Saitta, editors, Proceedings of the 16th Eureopean Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI'2004, including Prestigious Applicants of Intelligent Systems, PAIS 2004, Valencia, Spain, August 22-27, 2004, pages 161-165. IOS Press, 2004. Google Scholar
  16. Jiehua Chen, Gergely Csáji, Sanjukta Roy, and Sofia Simola. Hedonic games with friends, enemies, and neutrals: Resolving open questions and fine-grained complexity. In Noa Agmon, Bo An, Alessandro Ricci, and William Yeoh, editors, Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2023, London, United Kingdom, 29 May 2023 - 2 June 2023, pages 251-259. ACM, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.5555/3545946.3598644.
  17. Marek Cygan, Fedor V. Fomin, Lukasz Kowalik, Daniel Lokshtanov, Dániel Marx, Marcin Pilipczuk, Michal Pilipczuk, and Saket Saurabh. Parameterized Algorithms. Springer, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21275-3.
  18. Andreas Darmann, Edith Elkind, Sascha Kurz, Jérôme Lang, Joachim Schauer, and Gerhard J. Woeginger. Group activity selection problem with approval preferences. Int. J. Game Theory, 47(3):767-796, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00182-017-0596-4.
  19. Friedrich Eisenbrand and Robert Weismantel. Proximity results and faster algorithms for integer programming using the Steinitz lemma. ACM Trans. Algorithms, 16(1):5:1-5:14, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3340322.
  20. Angelo Fanelli, Gianpiero Monaco, and Luca Moscardelli. Relaxed core stability in fractional hedonic games. In Zhi-Hua Zhou, editor, Proceedings of the Thirtieth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2021, Virtual Event / Montreal, Canada, 19-27 August 2021, pages 182-188. ijcai.org, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2021/26.
  21. Michele Flammini, Bojana Kodric, Gianpiero Monaco, and Qiang Zhang. Strategyproof mechanisms for additively separable and fractional hedonic games. J. Artif. Intell. Res., 70:1253-1279, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1613/JAIR.1.12107.
  22. Florent Foucaud, Esther Galby, Liana Khazaliya, Shaohua Li, Fionn Mc Inerney, Roohani Sharma, and Prafullkumar Tale. Tight (double) exponential bounds for NP-complete problems: Treewidth and vertex cover parameterizations. CoRR, abs/2307.08149, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.08149.
  23. Martin Gairing and Rahul Savani. Computing stable outcomes in symmetric additively separable hedonic games. Math. Oper. Res., 44(3):1101-1121, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/MOOR.2018.0960.
  24. M. R. Garey and David S. Johnson. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W. H. Freeman, 1979. Google Scholar
  25. Tatsuya Gima, Tesshu Hanaka, Masashi Kiyomi, Yasuaki Kobayashi, and Yota Otachi. Exploring the gap between treedepth and vertex cover through vertex integrity. Theor. Comput. Sci., 918:60-76, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2022.03.021.
  26. Tesshu Hanaka, Airi Ikeyama, and Hirotaka Ono. Maximizing utilitarian and egalitarian welfare of fractional hedonic games on tree-like graphs. In Weili Wu and Jianxiong Guo, editors, Combinatorial Optimization and Applications - 17th International Conference, COCOA 2023, Hawaii, HI, USA, December 15-17, 2023, Proceedings, Part I, volume 14461 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 392-405. Springer, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49611-0_28.
  27. Tesshu Hanaka, Hironori Kiya, Yasuhide Maei, and Hirotaka Ono. Computational complexity of hedonic games on sparse graphs. In PRIMA, volume 11873 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 576-584. Springer, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33792-6_43.
  28. Tesshu Hanaka and Michael Lampis. Hedonic games and treewidth revisited. In Shiri Chechik, Gonzalo Navarro, Eva Rotenberg, and Grzegorz Herman, editors, 30th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms, ESA 2022, September 5-9, 2022, Berlin/Potsdam, Germany, volume 244 of LIPIcs, pages 64:1-64:16. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ESA.2022.64.
  29. David G. Harris and N. S. Narayanaswamy. A faster algorithm for vertex cover parameterized by solution size. In Olaf Beyersdorff, Mamadou Moustapha Kanté, Orna Kupferman, and Daniel Lokshtanov, editors, 41st International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, STACS 2024, March 12-14, 2024, Clermont-Ferrand, France, volume 289 of LIPIcs, pages 40:1-40:18. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPICS.STACS.2024.40.
  30. Ayumi Igarashi, Kazunori Ota, Yuko Sakurai, and Makoto Yokoo. Robustness against agent failure in hedonic games. In Sarit Kraus, editor, Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2019, Macao, China, August 10-16, 2019, pages 364-370. ijcai.org, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2019/52.
  31. Michael Lampis, Stefan Mengel, and Valia Mitsou. QBF as an alternative to Courcelle’s theorem. In Olaf Beyersdorff and Christoph M. Wintersteiger, editors, Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing - SAT 2018 - 21st International Conference, SAT 2018, Held as Part of the Federated Logic Conference, FloC 2018, Oxford, UK, July 9-12, 2018, Proceedings, volume 10929 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 235-252. Springer, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94144-8_15.
  32. Michael Lampis and Valia Mitsou. Treewidth with a quantifier alternation revisited. In Daniel Lokshtanov and Naomi Nishimura, editors, 12th International Symposium on Parameterized and Exact Computation, IPEC 2017, September 6-8, 2017, Vienna, Austria, volume 89 of LIPIcs, pages 26:1-26:12. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.IPEC.2017.26.
  33. Michael Lampis and Valia Mitsou. Fine-grained meta-theorems for vertex integrity. In Hee-Kap Ahn and Kunihiko Sadakane, editors, 32nd International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation, ISAAC 2021, December 6-8, 2021, Fukuoka, Japan, volume 212 of LIPIcs, pages 34:1-34:15. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ISAAC.2021.34.
  34. Dániel Marx and Valia Mitsou. Double-exponential and triple-exponential bounds for choosability problems parameterized by treewidth. In Ioannis Chatzigiannakis, Michael Mitzenmacher, Yuval Rabani, and Davide Sangiorgi, editors, 43rd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, ICALP 2016, July 11-15, 2016, Rome, Italy, volume 55 of LIPIcs, pages 28:1-28:15. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2016.28.
  35. Kazunori Ohta, Nathanaël Barrot, Anisse Ismaili, Yuko Sakurai, and Makoto Yokoo. Core stability in hedonic games among friends and enemies: Impact of neutrals. In Carles Sierra, editor, Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2017, Melbourne, Australia, August 19-25, 2017, pages 359-365. ijcai.org, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2017/51.
  36. Martin Olsen. Nash stability in additively separable hedonic games and community structures. Theory Comput. Syst., 45(4):917-925, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/S00224-009-9176-8.
  37. Martin Olsen, Lars Bækgaard, and Torben Tambo. On non-trivial Nash stable partitions in additive hedonic games with symmetric 0/1-utilities. Inf. Process. Lett., 112(23):903-907, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IPL.2012.08.016.
  38. Dominik Peters. Graphical hedonic games of bounded treewidth. In Dale Schuurmans and Michael P. Wellman, editors, Proceedings of the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, February 12-17, 2016, Phoenix, Arizona, USA, pages 586-593. AAAI Press, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1609/AAAI.V30I1.10046.
  39. Dominik Peters. Precise complexity of the core in dichotomous and additive hedonic games. In Jörg Rothe, editor, Algorithmic Decision Theory - 5th International Conference, ADT 2017, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, October 25-27, 2017, Proceedings, volume 10576 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 214-227. Springer, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67504-6_15.
  40. Debraj Ray. A game-theoretic perspective on coalition formation. Oxford University Press, 2007. Google Scholar
  41. Walid Saad, Zhu Han, Tamer Basar, Mérouane Debbah, and Are Hjørungnes. Hedonic coalition formation for distributed task allocation among wireless agents. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput., 10(9):1327-1344, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/TMC.2010.242.
  42. Jakub Sliwinski and Yair Zick. Learning hedonic games. In Carles Sierra, editor, Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2017, Melbourne, Australia, August 19-25, 2017, pages 2730-2736. ijcai.org, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2017/380.
  43. Shao Chin Sung and Dinko Dimitrov. On core membership testing for hedonic coalition formation games. Oper. Res. Lett., 35(2):155-158, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orl.2006.03.011.
  44. Shao Chin Sung and Dinko Dimitrov. Computational complexity in additive hedonic games. Eur. J. Oper. Res., 203(3):635-639, 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJOR.2009.09.004.
  45. Gerhard J. Woeginger. A hardness result for core stability in additive hedonic games. Math. Soc. Sci., 65(2):101-104, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2012.10.001.
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact