Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II

In the paper “Weak local Nash equilibrium” we define a concept of local equilibrium to non-cooperative games and we prove its existence applying the Lefschetz fixed point theorem. We was inspired by the original Nash’s theorem and his proof.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Date:2013
Main Authors: Biasi, C., Monis, T. F. M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Інститут математики НАН України 2013
Online Access:https://trim.imath.kiev.ua/index.php/trim/article/view/307
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Journal Title:Transactions of Institute of Mathematics of NAS of Ukraine
Download file: Pdf

Institution

Transactions of Institute of Mathematics of NAS of Ukraine
_version_ 1872552811951030272
author Biasi, C.
Monis, T. F. M.
Biasi, C.
Monis, T. F. M.
author_facet Biasi, C.
Monis, T. F. M.
Biasi, C.
Monis, T. F. M.
author_institution_txt_mv [ { "author": "C. Biasi", "institution": "Instituto de Ciências Matemáticas e de Computação, Universidade de São Paulo." }, { "author": "T. F. M. Monis", "institution": "Instituto de Geociências e Ciências Exatas, Univ Estadual Paulista" } ]
author_sort Biasi, C.
baseUrl_str https://trim.imath.kiev.ua/index.php/trim/oai
collection OJS
datestamp_date 2018-02-10T20:56:26Z
description In the paper “Weak local Nash equilibrium” we define a concept of local equilibrium to non-cooperative games and we prove its existence applying the Lefschetz fixed point theorem. We was inspired by the original Nash’s theorem and his proof.
first_indexed 2026-08-04T01:05:22Z
format Article
fulltext Збiрник праць Iн-ту математики НАН України 2013, том 6, N 6, 209–223 Carlos Biasi , Thaís F. M. Monis Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II biasi@icmc.usp.br , tfmonis@rc.unesp.br In the paper “Weak local Nash equilibrium” we define a concept of local equilibrium to non-cooperative games and we prove its existence applying the Lefschetz fixed point theorem. We was inspired by the original Nash’s theorem and his proof. 1 Introduction In the paper “Weak local Nash equilibrium” we define a concept of local equilibrium to non-cooperative games and we prove its existence applying the Lefschetz fixed point theorem. We was inspired by the original Nash’s theorem and his proof. The concept of Nash equilibrium says that an equilibrium for payoff functions p1, p2, . . . , pn : S = S1 × S2 × · · · × Sn → R is a point s̃ = (s̃1, s̃2, . . . , s̃n) ∈ S such that, for each i ∈ {1, 2, . . . , n}, pi(s̃1, . . . , s̃i−1, si, s̃i+1, . . . , s̃n) ≤ pi(s̃), for all si ∈ Si. Nash proved that: Theorem 1.1 (Nash’s Theorem). Let S1, . . . , Sn be compact convex sub- sets of an Euclidean space. Suppose that p1, . . . , pn : S = S1×· · ·×Sn → R are maps such that, for each i = 1, . . . , n, pi(s1, . . . , sn) is linear (afim) as a function of si. Then there exists at least one equilibrium to p1, . . . , pn. c© Carlos Biasi , Tháis F. M. Monis , 2013 210 Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II The proof is the following: let Si ⊂ Rdi , where di is the dimension of Si. Thus, S ⊂ Rd, where d = d1 + · · · + dn. From the hypothesis, the payoff functions are of the type pi(s) = vi(s) · si + ui(s) where vi : S → Rdi and ui : S → R are maps which don’t depend on the coordinate si, i = 1, . . . , n. Let v : S → Rd be the vector field defined by v(s) = (v1(s), . . . , vn(s)). Let r : Rn → S be the natural retraction that assigns each point p ∈ Rn to the point r(p) ∈ S which realizes the distance of p to S. Finally, let f : S → S be defined by f(s) = r(s+v(s)). Then, one can shown that s̃ ∈ S is a Nash equilibrium to p1, . . . , pn if and only if s̃ is a fixed point of f . Note that the existence of a fixed point to f is assured by Brouwer’s fixed point theorem. Based on the above proof, we investigated the existence of equilib- rium in the context that the spaces of strategies are compact ENR’s, not necessarily convex. This means that each space Si is a subset of some eu- clidean space Rdi and there is an open neighborhood Vi of Si in Rdi and a retraction ri : Vi → Si. From this research, the following definitions arise. Definition 1. Let (S1, d1), . . . , (Sn, dn) be metric spaces and p1, . . . , pn : S1 × · · · × Sn → R real functions. We say that s̃ = (s̃1, . . . , s̃n) ∈ S is a weak local equilibrium (abbrev., w.l.e.) for p1, . . . , pn if for all ε > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that pi(s̃1, . . . , s̃i−1, si, s̃i+1, . . . , s̃n) ≤ pi(s̃) + εdi(si, s̃i), for every si ∈ B(s̃i, δ), i = 1, 2, . . . , n, where B(s̃i, δ) denotes the open ball with center in s̃i and radius δ > 0 in (Si, di). Definition 2. We say that a subset X of Rm has the property of convenient retraction (abbrev., p.c.r.) if there exists a retraction r : V → X, where V is an open neighborhood of X in Rm, satisfying: given x0 ∈ V and ε > 0, there exists δ > 0 such that 〈x0 − r(x0), x− r(x0)〉 ≤ ε‖x− r(x0)‖, for all x ∈ X with ‖x− r(x0)‖ < δ, where 〈 , 〉 is the usual inner product in Rm and ‖ · ‖ is the norm induced by it. In this case, we say that r : V → X is a convenient retraction. Carlos Biasi , Thaís F. M. Monis 211 Example 1. Every closed convex subset K of Rm has the p.c.r.. In fact, there is a natural retraction r : Rm → K such that to each x ∈ Rm assigns the point r(x) ∈ K which realizes the distance of x to K. This retraction satisfies 〈x0 − r(x0), x − r(x0)〉 ≤ 0 for every x0 ∈ Rm and x ∈ K. Example 2 ([3], Proposition 4.3). Every submanifold M of Rn, of class C2, with or without boundary, has the p.c.r.. Let X be a closed subset of the Euclidean space Rn and let V be an open neighborhood of X in Rn. A map r : V → X is called a proximative retraction (or metric projection) if ‖r(y)− y‖ = dist(y,X), for every y ∈ V, where dist(y,X) = inf{‖x− y‖ | x ∈ X} is the distance of y to X. Evidently, every proximative retraction is a retraction map but not conversely. A compact subset K ⊂ Rn is called a proximative neighborhood re- tract (written K ∈ PANR) if there exists an open neighborhood V of K in Rn and a proximative retraction r : V → K. We have the following statement: Example 3 ([2]). Let K be a compact subset of Rn. If K ∈ PANR then K is an ENR with the p.c.r.. In the previous paper, we was able to prove the following result. Theorem 1.2 ([2]). Let p1, . . . , pn : S1 × . . . × Sn → R be maps, where each Si ⊂ Rmi is a compact ENR with the p.c.r.. Also, suppose pi(s1, . . . , sn) continuously differentiable in a neighborhood of si when the other variables are kept fixed, i = 1, 2, . . . , n. If χ(Si) 6= 0 for i = 1, 2, . . . , n then p1, p2, . . . , pn have at least one w.l.e.. Our goal in this paper is to prove a more general version of Theo- rem 1.2 changing the hypothesis of the continuously differentiable on the payoffs by a weaker hypothesis. 212 Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II 2 Preliminaires In this section, we define a concept of an upper semi differen- tiable(u.s.d.) function. The open ball in Rn with center in x0 and radius r > 0 will be denoted by B(x0, r). Definition 3. Let f : A → R be a function, where A is an open non- empty subset of Rn. Given x0 ∈ A, we say that f is upper semi differ- rentiable(u.s.d.) at x0 if there exists at least one point v ∈ Rn together with a function r : B(0, ε)→ R such that lim h→0 r(h) ‖h‖ = 0 and f(x0 + h) ≤ f(x0) + v · h+ r(h) for every h such that x0 + h ∈ A. We denote by DSf(x0) the set of such vectors v. Example 4. If f : A→ R is differentiable at x0 then f is u.s.d.. More- over, DSf(x0) = {f ′(x0)}. In fact, suppose v ∈ Rn and r : B(0, ε)→ R such that lim h→0 r(h) h = 0 and f(x0 + h) ≤ f(x0) + v · h+ r(h) for every h. Thus, for 0 < t < ε, f(x0 + tei)− f(x0) t ≤ v · ei + r(tei) t . It follows that ∂f ∂xi (x0) = lim t→0+ f(x0 + tei)− f(x0) t ≤ v · ei. On the other hand, for −ε < t < 0, f(x0 + tei)− f(x0) t ≥ v · ei + r(tei) t . It follows that ∂f ∂xi (x0) = lim t→0− f(x0 + tei)− f(x0) t ≥ v · ei. Therefore, ∂f ∂xi (x0) = v · ei. Thus, v = f ′(x0) = ( ∂f ∂x1 (x0), . . . , ∂f ∂xn (x0) ) . Carlos Biasi , Thaís F. M. Monis 213 The next result shows that the set DSf(x0) is convex. Theorem 2.1. If f is u.s.d. at x0 then DSf(x0) is a convex subset of Rn. Proof. Let v1, v2 ∈ DSf(x0) be arbitraires and let r1, r2 : B(0, ε) → R be such that f(x0 + h) ≤ f(x0) + v1 · h+ r1(h) f(x0 + h) ≤ f(x0) + v2 · h+ r2(h) with lim h→0 r1(h) ‖h‖ = lim h→0 r2(h) ‖h‖ = 0. Let v = αv1 + (1− α)v2, with α ∈ (0, 1). We have f(x0 + h) = αf(x0 + h) + (1− α)f(x0 + h) ≤ αf(x0) + αv1 · h+ αr1(h) + (1− α)f(x0) +(1− α)v2 · h+ (1− α)r2(h) = f(x0) + v · h+ αr1(h) + (1− α)r2(h). Since lim h→0 αr1(h) + (1− α)r2(h) ‖h‖ = α lim h→0 r1(h) ‖h‖ + (1− α) lim h→0 r2(h) ‖h‖ = 0, it follows that v ∈ DSf(x0). Therefore, DSf(x0) is convex. In the next theorems, we give conditions to DSf(x0) be compact. Theorem 2.2. Let f : J → R be a function, where J ⊂ R is open interval, and let x0 ∈ J . Suppose the existence of the right and left-hand limits c = lim h→0+ f(x0 + h)− f(x0) h and d = lim h→0− f(x0 + h)− f(x0) h Then, f is u.s.d. if and only if c ≤ d. Moreover, DSf(x0) = [c, d]. 214 Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II Proof. Suppose f u.s.d. at x0 and let v ∈ DSf(x0). If 0 < h < ε, we have f(x0 + h)− f(x0) h ≤ v + r(h) h , following that c = lim h→0+ f(x0 + h)− f(x0) h ≤ v. Analogously, if −ε < h < 0, we have f(x0 + h)− f(x0) h ≥ v + r(h) h , following that d = lim h→0− f(x0 + h)− f(x0) h ≥ v. Therefore, c ≤ d. On the other hand, suppose c ≤ d. Note that, above, we show that DSf(x0) ⊂ [c, d]. Now, to conclude thatDSf(x0) = [c, d], sinceDSf(x0) is convex, it is sufficient to show that c, d ∈ DSf(x0). Define r(h) =  f(x0 + h)− f(x0)− ch se h > 0 0 se h = 0 f(x0 + h)− f(x0)− dh se h < 0 Then lim h→0 r(h) h = 0. Moreover, for h > 0, we have f(x0 + h) = f(x0) + ch+ f(x0 + h)− f(x0)− ch and, for h < 0, we have f(x0 + h) = f(x0) + ch+ f(x0 + h)− f(x0)− ch ≤ f(x0) + ch+ +f(x0 + h)− f(x0)− dh Therefore, c ∈ DSf(x0). Analogously, for h > 0, we have f(x0 + h) = f(x0) + dh+ f(x0 + h)− f(x0)− dh ≤ f(x0) + dh+ +f(x0 + h)− f(x0)− ch Carlos Biasi , Thaís F. M. Monis 215 and for h < 0, f(x0 + h) = f(x0) + dh+ f(x0 + h)− f(x0)− dh Therefore, d ∈ DSf(x0). Example 5. Let f : R → R be defined by f(x) = { x, if x < 0 −x, if x ≥ 0 . The function f is u.s.d. at 0. In fact, we have lim h→0+ f(h)− f(0) h = −1 < 1 = lim h→0− f(h)− f(0) h Then, by Theorem 2.2, f is u.s.d. at 0 and DSf(0) = [−1, 1]. Notation: Let f : A → R be a map, where A is an open subset of Rn. Let x0 ∈ A. We denote the right-hand partial derivatives and the left-hand partial derivatives, respectively, by ∂f+ ∂xi (x0) = lim t→0+ f(x0 + tei)− f(x0) t and ∂f− ∂xi (x0) = lim t→0− f(x0 + tei)− f(x0) t i = 1, . . . , n Theorem 2.3. Let f : A → R be a map, A ⊂ Rn open. Suppose well defined the right-hand and the left-hand partial derivatives of f at every x0 ∈ A. Also, suppose the functions ∂f+ ∂xi , ∂f− ∂xi : A→ R continuous and that ∂f+ ∂xi (x0) ≤ ∂f− ∂xi (x0), ∀ x0 ∈ A, i = 1, . . . , n. Then, f is u.s.d. and DSf(x0) = [a1, b1]× [a2, b2]× · · · × [an, bn], 216 Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II where ai = ∂f+ ∂xi (x0), bi = ∂f− ∂xi (x0), i = 1, . . . , n. Thus, DSf : A( Rn is an u.s.c. multivalued map with convex compact values. Proof. Given x0 ∈ A, let ai = ∂f+ ∂xi (x0), bi = ∂f− ∂xi (x0), i = 1, . . . , n. The technique used to prove that DSf(x0) ⊂ [a1, b1]× [a2, b2]× · · · × [an, bn] is the same used in Theorem 2.2: let v = (v1, . . . , vn) ∈ DSf(x0) arbi- trary. Thus, f(x0 + h) ≤ f(x0) + v · h+ r(h), with lim h→0 r(h) ‖h‖ = 0. In particular, if h = tei then f(x0 + tei) ≤ f(x0) + tv · ei + r(tei), with lim h→0 r(tei) t = 0. It follows that, for every t > 0, f(x0 + tei)− f(x0) t ≤ vi + r(tei) t . Therefore ai = ∂f+ ∂xi (x0) ≤ vi. Also, for every t < 0, we have f(x0 + tei)− f(x0) t ≥ vi + r(tei) t . Therefore, bi = ∂f− ∂xi (x0) ≥ vi. Hence, v ∈ [a1, b1]× [a2, b2]× · · · × [an, bn]. Since DSf(x0) is convex, in order to prove the equality DSf(x0) = [a1, b1]× [a2, b2]× · · · × [an, bn] it is sufficient to show that each vertex of that parallelepiped is contained in DSf(x0). Carlos Biasi , Thaís F. M. Monis 217 To elucidate, we will write the proof to the case n = 2 and for the vertex (a1, a2). The general case is analogous. Let x0 = (x1, x2) and h = (h1, h2). We need to show that f(x1 + h1, x2 + h2)− f(x1, x2)− h1a1 − h2a2 ≤ r(h) with lim h→0 r(h) ‖h‖ = 0. Consider the functions g(y) = f(x1 +h1, y) and l(x) = f(x, x2). Note that ∂g+ ∂y (x2) = ∂f+ ∂x2 (x1 + h1, x2) ∂g− ∂y (x2) = ∂f− ∂x2 (x1 + h1, x2) ∂l+ ∂x (x1) = ∂f+ ∂x1 (x1, x2) ∂l− ∂x (x1) = ∂f− ∂x1 (x1, x2) >From Theorem 2.2, g and l are u.s.d.. Moreover, DSg(x2) = [ ∂f+ ∂x2 (x1 + h1, x2), ∂f− ∂x2 (x1 + h1, x2) ] and DSl(x1) = [ ∂f+ ∂x1 (x1, x2), ∂f− ∂x1 (x1, x2) ] . Thus, g(x2 + h2)− g(x2)− h2 ∂f+ ∂x2 (x1 + h1, x2) ≤ r1(h2) l(x1 + h1)− l(x1)− h1 ∂f+ ∂x1 (x1, x2) ≤ r2(h1) with lim x→0 r2(x) x = lim y→0 r1(y) y = 0. 218 Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II We have that f(x1 + h1, x2 + h2)− f(x1, x2)− h1a1 − h2a2 = g(x2 + h2)− g(x2)− h2 ∂f+ ∂x2 (x1 + h1, x2) + l(x1 + h1)− l(x1)− −h1 ∂f+ ∂x1 (x1, x2) + h2 [ ∂f+ ∂x2 (x1 + h1, x2)− ∂f+ ∂x2 (x1, x2) ] ≤ r(h) where r(h) = r1(h2) + r2(h1) + h2 [ ∂f+ ∂x2 (x1 + h1, x2)− ∂f+ ∂x2 (x1, x2) ] . Now, it is easy to see that lim h→0 r(h) ‖h‖ . 3 The main theorem In this section, we will stablish a generalization of the Theorem 1.2. It is the following: Theorem 3.1. Let p1, . . . , pn : S1 × . . . × Sn → R be maps, where each Si ⊂ Rmi is a compact ENR with the p.c.r.. Also, suppose that pi(s1, . . . , si, . . . , sn) as a function of si = (s11, . . . , s mi 1 ) satisfies: • The map xi 7−→ p(s−i, xi) can be continuously defined on a neighborhood Vi of Si. The symbol (s−i, xi) denotes the point (s1, . . . , si−1, xi, si+1, . . . , sn). • pi(s−i, ) : Vi → R has continuous lateral partial derivatives ∂pi + ∂xji (s−i, ), ∂pi − ∂xji (s−i, ) : Vi → R j = 1, . . . ,mi and • ∂pi + ∂xji (s−i, xi) ≤ ∂pi − ∂xji (s−i, xi), ∀ xi ∈ Vi With these assumptions, if χ(Si) 6= 0 for i = 1, 2, . . . , n then p1, p2, . . . , pn have at least one w.l.e.. Carlos Biasi , Thaís F. M. Monis 219 The proof of Theorem 3.1 is an application of a fixed point theorem of multivalued maps. 3.1 The Lefschetz Fixed Point Theorem for Admis- sible Multivalued Mappings The spaces considered here are metric. Also, we are considering the C̆ech homology functor with compact carriers and with coefficients in Q. A proper map f : X → Y is a map such that, for all K ⊂ X compact, f−1(K) is compact. A compact space X is called acyclic if H0(X) = Q and Hq(X) = 0 for q > 0. A map p : (X,X0) → (Y, Y0) is called a Vietoris map if p : X → Y is proper, p−1(Y0) = X0 and p−1(y) is acyclic, for every y ∈ Y . Symbol: p : (X,X0)⇒ (Y, Y0). Theorem 3.2 (Vietoris Mapping Theorem). If p : (X,X0)⇒ (Y, Y0) is a Vietoris map then p∗ : H∗(X,X0)→ H∗(Y, Y0) is an isomorphism. Let X and Y be two spaces and assume that for each point x ∈ X a nonempty closed subset ϕ(x) of Y is given; in this case, we say that ϕ is a multivalued map from X into Y and we write ϕ : X ( Y . A multivalued map ϕ : X ( Y is called upper semicontinuous (u.s.c.) if for every open subset U of Y the set ϕ−1(U) = {x ∈ X | ϕ(x) ⊂ U} is an open subset of X. An u.s.c. multivalued map ϕ : X ( Y is called acyclic if for every x ∈ X the set ϕ(x) is an acyclic subset of Y . An u.s.c. multivalued map ϕ : X ( Y is called admissible if there exists a space Γ and mappings p : Γ⇒ X, q : Γ→ Y such that: • p is a Vietoris map, • q(p−1(x)) ⊂ ϕ(x), for every x ∈ X. (p, q) is called a selected pair of ϕ (written (p, q) ⊂ ϕ). Let ϕ : X ( Y be an admissible multivalued map. The set {ϕ}∗ of linear induced mappings is defined by {ϕ}∗ = {q∗p−1∗ : H∗(X)→ H∗(Y ) | (p, q) ⊂ ϕ} 220 Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II Two admissible multivalued maps ϕ,ψ : X ( Y are called homotopic (written ϕ ∼ ψ) if there exists an admissible multivalued map χ : X×[0, 1] such that: χ(x, 0) ⊂ ϕ(x) and χ(x, 1) ⊂ ψ(x) for every x ∈ X Theorem 3.3 ([5], Theorem (40.11)). Let ϕ : X ( Y be two admissible multivalued maps. Then ϕ ∼ ψ implies that there exists selected pairs (p, q) ⊂ ϕ and (p̄, q̄) ⊂ ψ such that q∗p −1 ∗ = q̄∗p̄ −1 ∗ Let X be a compact ANR and let ϕ : X ( X be an admissible multivalued map. Then, it is well defined the Lefschetz set Λ(ϕ) of ϕ by putting Λ(ϕ) = {Λ(q∗p −1 ∗ ) = ∑ i (−1)itracei(q∗p−1∗ ) | (p, q) ⊂ ϕ} Theorem 3.4 (Lefschetz fixed point theorem for admissible multivalued mappings). Let X be a compact ANR and ϕ : X ( X be a compact admissible multivalued map. If Λ(ϕ) 6= {0} then Fix(ϕ) 6= ∅. 3.2 Proof of Theorem 3.1 In order to prove Theorem 3.1 we will define an admissible multivalued map F : S ( S and we will prove that if s̃ ∈ F (s̃) then s̃ is an w.l.e. for p1, . . . , pn. The conclusion of the proof will follow from the Lefschetz fixed point theorem for admissible multivalued mappings. First, we need the following lemma. Lemma 1. Let X be a compact subset of Rm and let V be an open neighborhood of X in Rm. Then, given a multivalued map ϕ : X ( Rm u.s.c. with compact values, there exists t1 > 0 such that x + tv ∈ V for all x ∈ X, v ∈ ϕ(x) and t ∈ [0, t1]. Proof. Let ϕ : X ( Rm be an u.s.c. multivalued map with compact values. If ϕ(x) = {0} for every x ∈ X, there is nothing to prove. Suppose Carlos Biasi , Thaís F. M. Monis 221 ϕ(x) 6= {0} for some x ∈ X. Since X is compact and ϕ is u.s.c. with compact values, the image ϕ(X) = ⋃ x∈X ϕ(x) is also compact. Then, the real number u = max v∈ϕ(X) {‖v‖} is a finite positive number. For every x ∈ X, there is εx > 0 such that B(x, εx) ⊂ V . Since X is compact, we obtain a finite open subcover { B ( xi, εxi 4 )}l i=1 with X ⊂ l⋃ i=1 B ( xi, εxi 4 ) ⊂ l⋃ i=1 B(xi, εxi ) ⊂ V. Let ε = min 1≤i≤l {εxi 4 } and t1 = ε u . Thus, x+tv ∈ V for all x ∈ X, v ∈ ϕ(x) and t ∈ [0, t1]. In fact, given x ∈ X, we have x ∈ B ( xi, εxi 4 ) for some xi. If v = 0 the conclusion is obvious. If v 6= 0 then, given t ∈ [0, t1], we have t ≤ t1 = ε u ≤ εxi 4u ≤ εxi 4‖v‖ . It follows that ‖x+ tv − xi‖ ≤ ‖x− xi‖+ t‖v‖ ≤ εxi 4 + εxi 4‖v‖ ‖v‖ = εxi 2 < εxi . Therefore, x+ tv ∈ B(xi, εxi ) ⊂ V . Hence, for all x ∈ X, v ∈ ϕ(x) and t ∈ [0, t1]. Proof of Theorem 3.1. Since S1 ⊂ Rm1 , . . . , Sn ⊂ Rmn are compact ENR’s with the p.c.r., the product S = S1×· · ·×Sn ⊂ Rm is also a space with the p.c.r, m = m1 + · · ·+mn. Thus, let r : V → S be a convenient retraction. Let ϕ : S ( Rm be the multivalued map defined by ϕ(s) = ϕ1(s)× · · · × ϕn(s) where ϕi(s) = DSpi(s−i, si). >From Lemma 1, there exists t1 > 0 such that s + tv ∈ V for all s ∈ S, t ∈ [0, t1] and v ∈ V (s). Finally, we define F : S ( S by F (s) = {r(s+ t1v) | v ∈ ϕ(s)}. 222 Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II As defined, F is a compact admissible multivalued map. Moreover, F is homotopic to the identity map via homotopy ψ : S× [0, t1]→ S given by ψ(s, t) = {r(s + tv) | v ∈ ϕ(s)}. Thus, by Theorema 3.3, there exists a selected pair (p, q) ⊂ F such that Λ(q∗p −1 ∗ ) = Λ(idS) = χ(S) = χ(S1) · · ·χ(Sn). If χ(Si) 6= 0, i = 1, . . . , n, then Λ(F ) 6= {0}. It follows, from Theorem 3.4, that F has a fixed point, ie, a point s̃ ∈ S such that s̃ ∈ F (s̃). We affirm that a such fixed point s̃ is a w.l.e. for p1, . . . , pn. In fact, if s̃ ∈ F (s̃) then s̃ = r(s̃ + t1v) for some v ∈ ϕ(s̃). Since r is a convenient retraction, given ε > 0, there exists δ > 0 such that ‖x− r(s̃+ t1v)‖ = ‖x− s̃‖ < δ implies that 〈s̃+ t1v − r(s̃+ t1v), x− r(s̃+ t1v)〉 = t1〈v, x− s̃〉 ≤ t1ε 2 ‖x− s̃‖. Moreover, from the definition of ϕ, we can assume that if ‖s̃ − s‖ < δ then pi(s̃1, . . . , s̃i−1, si, s̃i+1, . . . , s̃n) ≤ pi(s̃) + 〈vi, si − s̃i〉+ ε 2 ‖si − s̃i‖, 1 ≤ i ≤ n. It follows that, if s ∈ S and ‖s− s̃‖ < δ then pi(s̃1, . . . , s̃i−1, si, s̃i+1, . . . , s̃n) ≤ pi(s̃) + ε‖si − s̃i‖, 1 ≤ i ≤ n. Hence, s̃ is a w.l.e. for p1, . . . , pn. References [1] Alós-Ferrer, C., Ania, A.B., Local equilibria in economic games. Econom. Lett., 70, no. 2, 165-173 (2001). [2] Biasi, C., Monis, T.F.M., Weak local Nash equilibrium. Topological Methods in Nonlinear Analysis 41, no. 2, 409-419 (2013). Carlos Biasi , Thaís F. M. Monis 223 [3] Biasi, C., Mendes Monis, T. F., Some coincidence theorems and its applications to existence of local Nash equilibrium. JP J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 5, no. 2, 81-102 (2010). [4] Eilenberg, S., Montgomery, D., Fixed point theorems for multi-valued transformations. Amer. J. Math., 68, 214-222 (1946). [5] Górniewicz, L., Topological fixed point theory of multivalued map- pings. Second edition. Topological Fixed Point Theory and Its Ap- plications, 4. Springer, Dordrecht, 2006. [6] Milnor, J., A nobel prize for John Nash. Math. Intelligencer, 17, no. 3, 11-17 (1995). Carlos Biasi Instituto de Ciências Matemáticas e de Computação. Universidade de São Paulo. e-mail: biasi@icmc.usp.br Tháis Fernanda Mendes Monis Instituto de Geociências e Ciências Exatas. Univ Estadual Paulista. email: tfmonis@rc.unesp.br
id oai:trim.imath.kiev.ua:article-307
institution Transactions of Institute of Mathematics of NAS of Ukraine
keywords_txt_mv keywords
language English
last_indexed 2026-08-04T01:05:22Z
publishDate 2013
publisher Інститут математики НАН України
record_format ojs
resource_txt_mv trimimathkievua/b5/8d47a6c65018bd8a58604191b97205b5.pdf
spelling oai:trim.imath.kiev.ua:article-3072018-02-10T20:56:26Z Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II Слабка локальна точка рівноваги Неша - частина II Biasi, C. Monis, T. F. M. Biasi, C. Monis, T. F. M. In the paper “Weak local Nash equilibrium” we define a concept of local equilibrium to non-cooperative games and we prove its existence applying the Lefschetz fixed point theorem. We was inspired by the original Nash’s theorem and his proof. У роботі &quot;Слабка локальна точка рівноваги Неша&quot; ми визначаємо поняття локальної рівноваги для некооперативних ігор і доводимо його існування, застосовуючи теорему про нерухому точку Лефшеца. Нас надихнула оригінальна теорема Неша та його доказ. Інститут математики НАН України 2013-06-26 Article Article application/pdf https://trim.imath.kiev.ua/index.php/trim/article/view/307 Transactions of Institute of Mathematics, the NAS of Ukraine; Vol. 10 No. 6 (2013): Brasilian-Polish Topology Workshop; 209-223 Сборник Трудов Института математики НАН Украины; Том 10 № 6 (2013): Бразильсько-польський симпозіум з топології; 209-223 Збірник Праць Інституту математики НАН України; Том 10 № 6 (2013): Бразильсько-польський симпозіум з топології; 209-223 3083-7529 1815-2910 en https://trim.imath.kiev.ua/index.php/trim/article/view/307/287 Авторське право (c) 2013 Праці Інституту математики НАН України
spellingShingle Biasi, C.
Monis, T. F. M.
Biasi, C.
Monis, T. F. M.
Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II
title Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II
title_alt Слабка локальна точка рівноваги Неша - частина II
title_full Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II
title_fullStr Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II
title_full_unstemmed Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II
title_short Weak local Nash equilibrium - part II
title_sort weak local nash equilibrium - part ii
url https://trim.imath.kiev.ua/index.php/trim/article/view/307
work_keys_str_mv AT biasic weaklocalnashequilibriumpartii
AT monistfm weaklocalnashequilibriumpartii
AT biasic weaklocalnashequilibriumpartii
AT monistfm weaklocalnashequilibriumpartii
AT biasic slabkalokalʹnatočkarívnovaginešačastinaii
AT monistfm slabkalokalʹnatočkarívnovaginešačastinaii
AT biasic slabkalokalʹnatočkarívnovaginešačastinaii
AT monistfm slabkalokalʹnatočkarívnovaginešačastinaii