When Can Communication Lead to Efficiency?

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.12508
• Title: When Can Communication Lead to Efficiency?
• Authors: Itai Arieli, Yakov Babichenko, Atulya Jain, Rann Smorodinsky
• Classification: econ.TH (Economic Theory)
• Publication Date: October 14, 2025
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.12508

Abstract

This paper investigates games of incomplete information and characterizes when feasible outcomes are Pareto efficient. The research demonstrates that any outcome involving excessive randomization over actions is inefficient. Generally, efficiency requires that the total number of actions taken across all states be strictly less than the sum of the number of participants and states. The paper further examines the efficiency of equilibrium outcomes in communication models. Generally, cheap talk outcomes are efficient only when they involve pure strategies. When the sender's payoff is state-independent, efficiency holds if and only if the sender's most preferred action is chosen with certainty. In natural buyer-seller settings, Bayesian persuasion outcomes are inefficient across a wide range of priors and preferences.

Research Background and Motivation

Core Problem

The central question addressed by this paper is: When can strategic communication lead to Pareto efficient outcomes?

Importance of the Problem

1. Theoretical Significance: Pareto efficiency is a fundamental concept in economics, and understanding when efficiency can be achieved is crucial for mechanism design and policy formulation
2. Practical Applications: Strategic communication exists in many economic environments, including information disclosure, advertising, and political communication
3. Policy Implications: Understanding the efficiency boundaries of communication helps design better institutions and mechanisms

Limitations of Existing Research

1. Existing models of strategic communication (such as cheap talk and Bayesian persuasion) primarily focus on characterizing equilibrium outcomes rather than verifying whether these outcomes are Pareto efficient
2. Lack of simple efficiency conditions based on the number of actions
3. Insufficient understanding of the relationship between randomization and efficiency

Core Contributions

1. Establishes the connection between ex-ante and ex-post efficiency: Through convex geometric methods, proves that an outcome is ex-ante efficient if and only if it is ex-post efficient in all states and compatible
2. Provides necessary conditions based on the number of actions: Generally, efficiency requires $\sum_{\omega \in \Omega} |\mu(\omega)| < k + |\Omega|$
3. Characterizes efficiency conditions for cheap talk: Generally, cheap talk outcomes are efficient if and only if they involve pure strategies
4. Analyzes efficiency of Bayesian persuasion: In buyer-seller settings, proves that Bayesian persuasion outcomes are inefficient across a wide range of parameters
5. Extends to mechanism design: Demonstrates that results apply to multi-participant mechanism design problems

Methodology Details

Basic Model Setup

Consider a game of incomplete information with $k \geq 2$ participants:

• State space: $\Omega$, distributed according to a common prior $p \in \text{int}(\Delta\Omega)$
• Action space for participant $i$: $A_i$, pure strategy profile: $A = \prod_{i=1}^k A_i$
• Payoff function: $u_i : \Omega \times A \to \mathbb{R}$

Outcome Definition: A mapping $\mu : \Omega \to \Delta A$ that assigns an action distribution to each state

Core Theorems for Efficiency Characterization

Theorem 1: Necessary Conditions for Efficiency

Generally, a necessary condition for outcome $\mu : \Omega \to \Delta A$ to be efficient is: $\sum_{\omega \in \Omega} |\mu(\omega)| < k + |\Omega|$

where $|\mu(\omega)|$ denotes the size of the support in state $\omega$.

Proposition 1: Equivalence of Ex-ante and Ex-post Efficiency

An outcome $\mu$ is ex-ante efficient if and only if it is ex-post efficient in all states and compatible.

Compatibility Definition: There exists a strictly positive vector $n \in \mathbb{R}^k_{++}$ such that for all $\omega \in \Omega$, $u(\mu|\omega) \in S(F_\omega; n)$.

Proposition 2: Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Efficiency

An outcome $\mu$ is efficient if and only if: $\text{cone}(D_\mu) \cap \mathbb{R}^k_+ = \{0\}$

where $D_\mu$ is the set of all possible deviations.

Technical Innovations

1. Application of Minkowski Sums: Exploits the property that the feasible payoff set can be expressed as the Minkowski sum of feasible sets across states
2. Geometric Methods: Characterizes compatibility conditions by analyzing the intersection of normal cones
3. General Results: Provides efficiency conditions that do not depend on the prior distribution and randomization weights

Application Analysis

Sender-Receiver Models

Cheap Talk

Proposition 3: Generally, a cheap talk outcome is efficient if and only if it involves pure strategies.

Intuition: Any randomized outcome requires the sender to be indifferent between multiple actions, but generally the receiver will strictly prefer one of them, leading to inefficiency.

Proposition 4: When the sender's payoff is state-independent, a cheap talk outcome is efficient if and only if the sender's most preferred action is chosen with certainty.

Bayesian Persuasion

Buyer-Seller Setting:

• The seller (sender) provides product information to the buyer (receiver)
• The state represents the product that is optimal for the buyer
• The buyer wishes to choose the best product; the seller only cares about selling high-revenue products

Proposition 5: For $n \geq 2$ products, there exists a set $R^* \subseteq C_0$ such that for all $p \in \text{int}(R^*)$, Bayesian persuasion outcomes are inefficient.

Proposition 6: For any prior $p \in \text{int}(\Delta\Omega)$, there exists a threshold $T_p < 1$ such that when $T > T_p$, Bayesian persuasion outcomes are inefficient.

Peer Selection Mechanisms

Proposition 7: Under mild conditions, ranking-based peer selection mechanisms are generally inefficient.

Reason: The randomness in the mechanism results in $\sum_{\omega \in \Omega} |\mu(\omega)| \geq 2|\Omega| > k + |\Omega|$, violating the necessary condition for efficiency.

Main Findings

Theoretical Insights

1. Trade-off between Randomization and Efficiency: Excessive randomization necessarily leads to inefficiency
2. Limitations of Communication: Even with communication, conflicting interests obstruct the achievement of efficiency
3. Role of Commitment: The ability to commit in Bayesian persuasion does not guarantee efficiency

Empirical Implications

1. Policy Design: When designing information disclosure policies, efficiency losses must be considered
2. Market Mechanisms: Understanding when market communication can achieve efficient allocation
3. Organizational Design: Balancing information transmission and efficiency in organizational communication

Related Work

Strategic Communication Literature

• Crawford and Sobel (1982): Foundational work on cheap talk models
• Kamenica and Gentzkow (2011): Bayesian persuasion theory
• Ichihashi (2019): Limiting sender information's impact on welfare

Efficiency and Equilibrium Literature

• Case (1974), Dubey (1986): Efficiency conditions for Nash equilibrium
• Rudov et al. (2025): Possibilities for improvement in correlated equilibrium
• Arieli et al. (2017): Commitment procedures and efficiency

Mechanism Design Literature

• Niemeyer and Preusser (2024): Mechanism design without transfers
• Bergemann and Morris (2019): Unified perspective on information design

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Scarcity of Efficiency: In strategic environments with conflicting interests, efficiency is difficult to achieve
2. Cost of Randomization: Excessive randomization is the enemy of efficiency
3. Limitations of Communication: Strategic communication often cannot overcome fundamental incentive problems

Limitations

1. Generic Assumptions: Results depend on "generic" conditions; special cases may be exceptions
2. Static Analysis: Does not consider reputation effects in repeated games
3. Perfect Rationality: Assumes participants are perfectly rational with no learning processes

Future Directions

1. Sufficient Conditions: Seeking sufficient conditions that guarantee persuasion outcomes are efficient
2. Alternative Mechanisms: Investigating other communication protocols such as mediation and delegation
3. Dynamic Extensions: Considering efficiency issues in repeated interactions

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Significant Theoretical Contribution: Provides concise and powerful characterization of efficiency
2. Novel Methodology: Cleverly applies convex geometry and Minkowski sum theory
3. Broad Applicability: Results apply to diverse economic environments
4. Thorough Analysis: Combines general theory with specific applications

Weaknesses

1. Lack of Empirical Verification: Primarily theoretical analysis without empirical validation
2. Limited Constructiveness: Mainly provides negative results with limited guidance on achieving efficiency
3. Strong Assumptions: Generic conditions may not always hold in practice

Impact

1. Theoretical Impact: Provides new analytical tools for information economics
2. Policy Implications: Important insights for regulatory policy and mechanism design
3. Research Inspiration: Provides new directions and methods for subsequent research

Applicable Scenarios

1. Financial Markets: Analyzing efficiency consequences of information disclosure
2. Political Economy: Studying welfare effects of political communication
3. Organizational Economics: Designing effective internal communication mechanisms
4. Industrial Organization: Analyzing efficiency impacts of advertising and marketing

References

• Crawford, V. P. and Sobel, J. (1982). Strategic information transmission. Econometrica, 1431-1451.
• Kamenica, E. and Gentzkow, M. (2011). Bayesian persuasion. American Economic Review, 101(6), 2590-2615.
• Rudov, K., Sandomirskiy, F., and Yariv, L. (2025). Extreme equilibria: the benefits of correlation. EC '25.
• Bergemann, D. and Morris, S. (2019). Information design: A unified perspective. Journal of Economic Literature, 57(1), 44-95.

Summary: This paper provides an important theoretical foundation for understanding efficiency issues in strategic communication. Through sophisticated mathematical tools and rigorous economic analysis, the authors reveal fundamental limitations on communication's ability to achieve efficiency, making significant contributions to both the theory and practice of information economics.