IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v118y2019icp342-353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Balanced implementability of sequencing rules

Author

Listed:
  • De, Parikshit
  • Mitra, Manipushpak

Abstract

We address the balanced implementation issue for sequencing problems under incomplete information. For sequencing problems with more than two agents, we identify an important priority based sufficient class of rules that are implementable with balanced transfers. We also show that any linear sequencing rule is implementable with balanced transfers if and only if there are more than two agents. In the appendix we identify the complete class of rules that are implementable with balanced transfers when there are two agents.

Suggested Citation

  • De, Parikshit & Mitra, Manipushpak, 2019. "Balanced implementability of sequencing rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 342-353.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:118:y:2019:i:c:p:342-353
    DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2019.09.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825619301368
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.geb.2019.09.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hervé Moulin, 2007. "On Scheduling Fees to Prevent Merging, Splitting, and Transferring of Jobs," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 266-283, May.
    2. Mishra, Debasis & Sen, Arunava, 2012. "Robertsʼ Theorem with neutrality: A social welfare ordering approach," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 283-298.
    3. Walker, Mark, 1980. "On the Nonexistence of a Dominant Strategy Mechanism for Making Optimal Public Decisions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(6), pages 1521-1540, September.
    4. Hain, Roland & Mitra, Manipushpak, 2004. "Simple sequencing problems with interdependent costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 271-291, August.
    5. , & ,, 2013. "Implementation in multidimensional dichotomous domains," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 8(2), May.
    6. Thierry Marchant & Debasis Mishra, 2015. "Mechanism design with two alternatives in quasi-linear environments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(2), pages 433-455, February.
    7. Ron Lavi & Ahuva Mu’alem & Noam Nisan, 2009. "Two simplified proofs for Roberts’ theorem," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(3), pages 407-423, March.
    8. Sushil Bikhchandani & Shurojit Chatterji & Ron Lavi & Ahuva Mu'alem & Noam Nisan & Arunava Sen, 2006. "Weak Monotonicity Characterizes Deterministic Dominant-Strategy Implementation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(4), pages 1109-1132, July.
    9. Carbajal, Juan Carlos & McLennan, Andrew & Tourky, Rabee, 2013. "Truthful implementation and preference aggregation in restricted domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 1074-1101.
    10. Jeroen Suijs, 1996. "On incentive compatibility and budget balancedness in public decision making," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 2(1), pages 193-209, December.
    11. Milgrom,Paul, 2004. "Putting Auction Theory to Work," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521536721.
    12. M. Yenmez, 2015. "Incentive compatible market design with applications," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(3), pages 543-569, August.
    13. Manipushpak Mitra, 2002. "Achieving the first best in sequencing problems," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 7(1), pages 75-91.
    14. Wayne E. Smith, 1956. "Various optimizers for single‐stage production," Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1‐2), pages 59-66, March.
    15. Hurwicz, Leonid & Walker, Mark, 1990. "On the Generic Nonoptimality of Dominant-Strategy Allocation Mechanisms: A General Theorem That Includes Pure Exchange Economies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(3), pages 683-704, May.
    16. Debasis Mishra & Abdul Quadir, 2014. "Non-bossy single object auctions," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 2(1), pages 93-110, April.
    17. Robert J. Dolan, 1978. "Incentive Mechanisms for Priority Queuing Problems," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 421-436, Autumn.
    18. Rochet, Jean-Charles, 1987. "A necessary and sufficient condition for rationalizability in a quasi-linear context," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 191-200, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Conan Mukherjee, 2020. "On group strategyproof and optimal object allocation," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 289-304, October.
    2. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2023. "Balanced VCG mechanisms for sequencing problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 60(1), pages 35-46, January.
    3. Banerjee, Sreoshi & De, Parikshit & Mitra, Manipushpak, 2020. "A welfarist approach to sequencing problems with incentives," MPRA Paper 107188, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Parikshit De & Manipushpak Mitra, 2017. "Incentives and justice for sequencing problems," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 64(2), pages 239-264, August.
    2. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2023. "Balanced VCG mechanisms for sequencing problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 60(1), pages 35-46, January.
    3. Mishra, Debasis & Nath, Swaprava & Roy, Souvik, 2018. "Separability and decomposition in mechanism design with transfers," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 240-261.
    4. Rahul Deb & Debasis Mishra, 2014. "Implementation With Contingent Contracts," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82, pages 2371-2393, November.
    5. Banerjee, Sreoshi & De, Parikshit & Mitra, Manipushpak, 2020. "A welfarist approach to sequencing problems with incentives," MPRA Paper 107188, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. M. Yenmez, 2015. "Incentive compatible market design with applications," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(3), pages 543-569, August.
    7. Banerjee, Sreoshi, 2023. "Stability and fairness in sequencing games: optimistic approach and pessimistic scenarios," MPRA Paper 118680, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Carbajal, Juan Carlos & McLennan, Andrew & Tourky, Rabee, 2013. "Truthful implementation and preference aggregation in restricted domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 1074-1101.
    9. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2019. "Recent developments in the queueing problem," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 27(1), pages 1-23, April.
    10. Conan Mukherjee, 2013. "Weak group strategy-proof and queue-efficient mechanisms for the queueing problem with multiple machines," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(1), pages 131-163, February.
    11. Ju, Yuan & Chun, Youngsub & van den Brink, René, 2014. "Auctioning and selling positions: A non-cooperative approach to queueing conflicts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 33-45.
    12. Long, Yan & Mishra, Debasis & Sharma, Tridib, 2017. "Balanced ranking mechanisms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 9-39.
    13. Bloch, Francis, 2017. "Second-best mechanisms in queuing problems without transfers:The role of random priorities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 73-79.
    14. Carbajal, Juan Carlos & Müller, Rudolf, 2015. "Implementability under monotonic transformations in differences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 114-131.
    15. Kazuhiko Hashimoto & Hiroki Saitoh, 2012. "Strategy-proof and anonymous rule in queueing problems: a relationship between equity and efficiency," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(3), pages 473-480, March.
    16. Hervé Moulin, 2007. "On Scheduling Fees to Prevent Merging, Splitting, and Transferring of Jobs," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 266-283, May.
    17. Hain, Roland & Mitra, Manipushpak, 2004. "Simple sequencing problems with interdependent costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 271-291, August.
    18. Paul H. Edelman & John A Weymark, 2017. "Dominant Strategy Implementability, Zero Length Cycles, and Affine Maximizers," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 17-00002, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    19. Moulin, Hervé, 2008. "Proportional scheduling, split-proofness, and merge-proofness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 567-587, July.
    20. Thierry Marchant & Debasis Mishra, 2015. "Mechanism design with two alternatives in quasi-linear environments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(2), pages 433-455, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Sequencing rules; Balanced implementation; GP-CM sequencing rules; Linear sequencing rules; i-CP sequencing rules;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • C79 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Other
    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:118:y:2019:i:c:p:342-353. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622836 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.