Abstract. Different kinds of networks, such as transportation, communication, computer, and supply networks, are susceptible to similar kinds of inefficiencies. These arise when congestion externalities make the cost for each user depend on the other users' choice of routes. If each user chooses the least expensive (e.g., the fastest) route from the users' common point of origin to the common destination, the result may be Pareto inefficient in that an alternative choice of routes would reduce the costs for all users. Braess's paradox represents an extreme kind of inefficiency, in which the equilibrium costs may be reduced by raising the cost curves. As this paper shows, this paradox occurs in an (undirected) twoterminal network if and only if it is not series-parallel. More generally, Pareto inefficient equilibria occur in a network if and only if one of three simple networks is embedded in it. JEL Classification: C72, R41.
Abstract. Different kinds of networks, such as transportation, communication, computer, and supply networks, are susceptible to similar kinds of inefficiencies. These arise when congestion externalities make the cost for each user depend on the other users' choice of routes. If each user chooses the least expensive (e.g., the fastest) route from the users' common point of origin to the common destination, the result may be Pareto inefficient in that an alternative choice of routes would reduce the costs for all users. Braess's paradox represents an extreme kind of inefficiency, in which the equilibrium costs may be reduced by raising the cost curves. As this paper shows, this paradox occurs in an (undirected) twoterminal network if and only if it is not series-parallel. More generally, Pareto inefficient equilibria occur in a network if and only if one of three simple networks is embedded in it. JEL Classification: C72, R41.
Equilibrium flow in a physical network with a large number of users (e.g., transportation, communication, and computer networks) need not be unique if the costs of the network elements are not the same for all users. Such differences among users may arise if they are not equally affected by congestion or have different intrinsic preferences. Whether or not, for all assignments of strictly increasing cost functions, each user's equilibrium cost is the same in all Nash equilibria can be determined from the network topology. Specifically, this paper shows that in a two-terminal network, the equilibrium costs are always unique if and only if the network is one of several simple networks or consists of several such networks connected in series. The complementary class of all two-terminal networks with multiple equilibrium costs for some assignment of (user-specific) strictly increasing cost functions is similarly characterized by an embedded network of a particular simple type. 1. Introduction. Different kinds of networks, such as transportation, communication, and computer networks exhibit congestion effects, whereby increased demand for certain network elements (e.g., roads, telecommunication lines, and servers) tends to downgrade their performance or increase the cost of using them. In such networks, the users' decisions (e.g., choice of routes) are interdependent in that their optimal choices (e.g., the fastest routes) depend on what the others do. If they all choose optimally, given the others' choices, then the users' choices constitute a Nash equilibrium. Even if the users are identical in all respects, due to the congestion externalities, their choices at equilibrium may differ. However, if the number of users is very large and each of them has a negligibly small effect on the others, then they have equal equilibrium payoffs or costs. Moreover, the payoffs or costs in different equilibria are the same (Aashtiani and Magnanti [1]). With a heterogeneous population of users (i.e., a multiclass network; Dafermos [5]), this need not be so. As the following example shows, if the users are not identical, and are differently affected by congestion, equilibrium costs may vary not only across users, but also from one Nash equilibrium to another. Example 1.1. A continuum of three classes of users travels on the two-terminal network shown in Figure 2(a) below. Each user has to choose one of the four routes connecting the users' common point of origin o and the common destination d. The cost of each route is the sum of the costs of its edges. For each user class, the cost of each edge e is given by an increasing affine function of the fraction x of the total population with a route that includes e. The fraction of the population in each class and the corresponding cost functions are given in Figure 1, where blank cells indicate prohibitively high costs. Clearly, users in each class effectively have a choice of only two routes from o to d e 1 and e 2 e 5 for Class I users, e 2 e 5 and e 3 for Class II, and e 3 and e 4 e 5 ...
A crowding game is a noncooperative game in which the payo¤ of each player depends only on the player's action and the size of the set of players choosing that particular action: The larger the set, the smaller the payo¤. Finite, n-player crowding games often have multiple equilibria. However, a large crowding game generically has just one equilibrium, and the equilibrium payo¤s in such a game are always unique. Moreover, the sets of equilibria of the m-replicas of a …nite crowding game generically converge to a singleton as m tends to in…nity. This singleton consists of the unique equilibrium of the "limit" large crowding game. This equilibrium generically has the following graph-theoretic property: The bipartite graph, in which each player in the original, …nite crowding game is joined with all best-response actions for (copies of) that player, does not contain cycles.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.