IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and European Control Conference 2011
DOI: 10.1109/cdc.2011.6160508
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Constrained consensus for bargaining in dynamic coalitional TU games

Abstract: Abstract-We consider a sequence of transferable utility (TU) games where, at each time, the characteristic function is a random vector with realizations restricted to some set of values. We assume that the players in the game interact only with their neighbors, where the neighbors may vary over time. The game differs from other ones in the literature on dynamic, stochastic or interval valued TU games as it combines dynamics of the game with an allocation protocol for the players that dynamically interact with … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 21 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this paper we consider coalitional TU games in which there is no central coordinator, so that players have to negotiate among themselves how to allocate rewards. In particular, each player can communicate only with neighboring players according to a neighbor graph and generates, at each communication round, a vector of players' rewards (see also the distributed allocation processes in Nedić and Bauso (2011)). The objective is that all the agents reach asymptotically a common (temporal) average reward that lies in the core of the game.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this paper we consider coalitional TU games in which there is no central coordinator, so that players have to negotiate among themselves how to allocate rewards. In particular, each player can communicate only with neighboring players according to a neighbor graph and generates, at each communication round, a vector of players' rewards (see also the distributed allocation processes in Nedić and Bauso (2011)). The objective is that all the agents reach asymptotically a common (temporal) average reward that lies in the core of the game.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%