arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2501.00191

Equilibria in Network Constrained Markets with System Operator

Abstract

We study a networked economic system composed of $n$ producers supplying a single homogeneous good to a number of geographically separated markets and of a centralized authority, called the market maker. Producers compete à la Cournot, by choosing the quantities of good to supply to each market they have access to in order to maximize their profit. Every market is characterized by its inverse demand functions returning the unit price of the considered good as a function of the total available quantity. Markets are interconnected by a dispatch network through which quantities of the considered good can flow within finite capacity constraints and possibly satisfying additional linear physical constraints. Such flows are determined by the action of a system operator, who aims at maximizing a designated welfare function. We model such competition as a strategic game with $n+1$ players: the producers and the system operator. For this game, we first establish the existence of pure-strategy Nash equilibria under standard concavity assumptions. We then identify sufficient conditions for the game to be exact potential with an essentially unique Nash equilibrium. Next, we present a general result that connects the optimal action of the system operator with the capacity constraints imposed on the network. For the commonly used Walrasian welfare, our finding proves a connection between capacity bottlenecks in the market network and the emergence of price differences between markets separated by saturated lines. This phenomenon is frequently observed in real-world scenarios, for instance in power networks. Finally, we validate the model with data from the Italian day-ahead electricity market.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Giacomo Como, Fabio Fagnani, Leonardo Massai, Martina Vanelli. 2026-08-29. Equilibria in Network Constrained Markets with System Operator. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.00191

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Peer Oversight in Collective Decision Making

This article introduces peer $k$-oversight, a property of sequential collective decision mechanisms requiring at least $k$ agents to be responsible for every harmful outcome. It is shown that whenever $k$-oversight can be achieved by redistributing control over the decisions in a mechanism, it can be achieved using just $k$ agents. A polynomial-time algorithm is also presented that determines whether such a redistribution exists and, when it does, constructs one. These results establish peer oversight as a tractable design principle for multiagent decision-making systems.

cs.GT

Fully Distributed GNE Algorithms for Multi-Robot Placement without Consensus on Multipliers

Recent machine learning research has increasingly focused on equilibrium analysis in non-cooperative games rather than solely on optimal solutions. Many such problems involve shared constraints and can be formulated as Generalized Nash Equilibrium Problems (GNEPs). For strongly monotone games, existing methods compute consensus-based variational GNEs (v-GNEs) by exchanging Lagrange multipliers. We propose a fully distributed continuous-time algorithm for shared linear equality constraints that converges without multiplier exchange and reaches any GNE, reducing communication overhead and improving privacy. Discrete-time schemes are also provided, and the method is validated on a multi-robot placement task.

cs.LG

Level-2 Inverse Games for Inferring Agents' Estimates of Others' Objectives

Effectively interpreting strategic interactions among multiple agents requires us to infer each agent's objective from limited information. Existing inverse game-theoretic approaches frame this challenge in terms of a "level-1" inference problem, in which we take the perspective of a third-party observer and assume that individual agents share complete knowledge of one another's objectives. However, this assumption breaks down in decentralized, real-world scenarios like urban driving and bargaining, in which agents may act based on conflicting views of one another's objectives. We demonstrate the necessity of inferring agents' different estimates of each other's objectives through empirical examples, and by theoretically characterizing the prediction error of level-1 inference on fictitious gameplay data from linear-quadratic games. To address this fundamental issue, we propose a framework for level-2 inference to address the question: "What does each agent believe about other agents' objectives?" We prove that the level-2 inference problem is non-convex even in benign settings like linear-quadratic games, and we develop an efficient gradient-based approach for identifying local solutions. Experiments on a synthetic urban driving example show that our approach uncovers nuanced misalignments that level-1 methods miss.

cs.GT