  Consider a setting where $N$ players, partitioned into $K$ observable types,
form a directed network. Agents' preferences over the form of the network
consist of an arbitrary network benefit function (e.g., agents may have
preferences over their network centrality) and a private component which is
additively separable in own links. This latter component allows for unobserved
heterogeneity in the costs of sending and receiving links across agents
(respectively out- and in- degree heterogeneity) as well as
homophily/heterophily across the $K$ types of agents. In contrast, the network
benefit function allows agents' preferences over links to vary with the
presence or absence of links elsewhere in the network (and hence with the link
formation behavior of their peers). In the null model which excludes the
network benefit function, links form independently across dyads in the manner
described by \cite{Charbonneau_EJ17}. Under the alternative there is
interdependence across linking decisions (i.e., strategic interaction). We show
how to test the null with power optimized in specific directions. These
alternative directions include many common models of strategic network
formation (e.g., "connections" models, "structural hole" models etc.). Our
random utility specification induces an exponential family structure under the
null which we exploit to construct a similar test which exactly controls size
(despite the the null being a composite one with many nuisance parameters). We
further show how to construct locally best tests for specific alternatives
without making any assumptions about equilibrium selection. To make our tests
feasible we introduce a new MCMC algorithm for simulating the null
distributions of our test statistics.
