IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-04018735.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sharing values for multi-choice games: an axiomatic approach

Author

Listed:
  • David Lowing

    (Kyushu University)

  • Makoto Yokoo

    (Kyushu University)

Abstract

A Sharing value for transferable utility games distributes the Harsanyi dividend of each coalition among the players in the coalition's support. Such distribution is done according to a certain sharing system that determines the Sharing value. In this paper, we extend Sharing values to multi-choice games. Multi-choice games are a generalization of transferable utility games in which players have several activity levels. Unlike in transferable utility games, there is no straightforward way to interpret the support of a coalition in a multi-choice game. This makes it more tedious to distribute the Harsanyi dividend of a multi-choice coalition. We consider three possible interpretations of the support of a multi-choice coalition. Based on these interpretations, we derive three families of Sharing values for multi-choice games. To conduct this study, we discuss novel and classical axioms for multi-choice games. This allows us to provide an axiomatic foundation for each of these families of values.

Suggested Citation

  • David Lowing & Makoto Yokoo, 2023. "Sharing values for multi-choice games: an axiomatic approach," Working Papers hal-04018735, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-04018735
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04018735
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04018735/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michel Grabisch & Lijue Xie, 2007. "A new approach to the core and Weber set of multichoice games," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 66(3), pages 491-512, December.
    2. Hans Peters & Horst Zank, 2005. "The Egalitarian Solution for Multichoice Games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 399-409, July.
    3. Manfred Besner, 2020. "Value dividends, the Harsanyi set and extensions, and the proportional Harsanyi solution," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(3), pages 851-873, September.
    4. David Lowing & Kevin Techer, 2022. "Marginalism, egalitarianism and efficiency in multi-choice games," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(4), pages 815-861, November.
    5. Jean Derks & Gerard Laan & Valery Vasil’ev, 2006. "Characterizations of the Random Order Values by Harsanyi Payoff Vectors," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 64(1), pages 155-163, August.
    6. Techer, Kevin, 2021. "Stable agreements through liability rules: A multi-choice game approach to the social cost problem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 77-88.
    7. Hsiao, Chih-Ru & Raghavan, T E S, 1992. "Monotonicity and Dummy Free Property for Multi-choice Cooperative Games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 21(3), pages 301-312.
    8. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    9. José Zarzuelo & Marco Slikker & Flip Klijn, 1999. "Characterizations of a multi-choice value," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 28(4), pages 521-532.
    10. S. Béal & A. Lardon & E. Rémila & P. Solal, 2012. "The average tree solution for multi-choice forest games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 196(1), pages 27-51, July.
    11. Manfred Besner, 2020. "Parallel axiomatizations of weighted and multiweighted Shapley values, random order values, and the Harsanyi set," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(1), pages 193-212, June.
    12. Jean Derks & Hans Haller & Hans Peters, 2000. "The selectope for cooperative games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 29(1), pages 23-38.
    13. R. Branzei & E. Gutiérrez & N. Llorca & J. Sánchez-Soriano, 2021. "Does it make sense to analyse a two-sided market as a multi-choice game?," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 301(1), pages 17-40, June.
    14. Monderer, Dov & Samet, Dov & Shapley, Lloyd S, 1992. "Weighted Values and the Core," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 21(1), pages 27-39.
    15. Lowing, David & Techer, Kevin, 2022. "Priority relations and cooperation with multiple activity levels," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    16. Valeri Vasil'ev & Gerard van der Laan, 2001. "The Harsanyi Set for Cooperative TU-Games," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 01-004/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    17. Derks, J J M, 1992. "A Short Proof of the Inclusion of the Core in the Weber Set," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 21(2), pages 149-150.
    18. Derks, Jean & Peters, Hans, 1993. "A Shapley Value for Games with Restricted Coalitions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 21(4), pages 351-360.
    19. Manfred Besner, 2020. "Correction to: Parallel axiomatizations of weighted and multiweighted Shapley values, random order values, and the Harsanyi set," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(1), pages 213-214, June.
    20. Yan-An Hwang & Yu-Hsien Liao, 2009. "Equivalence theorem, consistency and axiomatizations of a multi-choice value," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 597-613, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. David Lowing & Kevin Techer, 2022. "Marginalism, egalitarianism and efficiency in multi-choice games," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(4), pages 815-861, November.
    2. David Lowing & Kevin Techer, 2021. "Marginalism, Egalitarianism and E ciency in Multi-Choice Games," Working Papers halshs-03334056, HAL.
    3. David Lowing, 2023. "Allocation rules for multi-choice games with a permission tree structure," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 320(1), pages 261-291, January.
    4. Lowing, David & Techer, Kevin, 2022. "Priority relations and cooperation with multiple activity levels," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    5. S. Béal & A. Lardon & E. Rémila & P. Solal, 2012. "The average tree solution for multi-choice forest games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 196(1), pages 27-51, July.
    6. Fanyong Meng & Qiang Zhang & Xiaohong Chen, 2017. "Fuzzy Multichoice Games with Fuzzy Characteristic Functions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 565-595, May.
    7. Sylvain Béal & Adriana Navarro-Ramos & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal, 2023. "Sharing the cost of hazardous transportation networks and the Priority Shapley value," Working Papers 2023-03, CRESE.
    8. Bilbao, J.M. & Jiménez, N. & López, J.J., 2010. "The selectope for bicooperative games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 204(3), pages 522-532, August.
    9. Hwang, Yan-An & Liao, Yu-Hsien, 2008. "Potential approach and characterizations of a Shapley value in multi-choice games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 321-335, November.
    10. Yu-Hsien Liao, 2012. "Converse consistent enlargements of the unit-level-core of the multi-choice games," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 20(4), pages 743-753, December.
    11. Branzei, R. & Tijs, S. & Zarzuelo, J., 2009. "Convex multi-choice games: Characterizations and monotonic allocation schemes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(2), pages 571-575, October.
    12. Hsiao, Chih-Ru & Chiou, Wen-Lin, 2009. "Modeling a Multi-Choice Game Based on the Spirit of Equal Job opportunities," MPRA Paper 15285, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Demuynck, Thomas & Rock, Bram De & Ginsburgh, Victor, 2016. "The transfer paradox in welfare space," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1-4.
    14. Sylvain Béal & Sylvain Ferrières & Philippe Solal, 2022. "The priority value for cooperative games with a priority structure," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 51(2), pages 431-450, June.
    15. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2008:i:43:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. David Lowing, 2023. "Cost allocation in energy distribution networks," Working Papers hal-03680156, HAL.
    17. Techer, Kevin, 2021. "Stable agreements through liability rules: A multi-choice game approach to the social cost problem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 77-88.
    18. Pierre Dehez, 2017. "On Harsanyi Dividends and Asymmetric Values," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(03), pages 1-36, September.
    19. Yan-An Hwang & Yu-Hsien Liao, 2008. "The solutions for multi-choice games: TU games approach," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(43), pages 1-7.
    20. Zhengxing Zou & Qiang Zhang, 2018. "Harsanyi power solution for games with restricted cooperation," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 26-47, January.
    21. Larrea, C. & Santos, J.C., 2007. "A characterization of the pseudo-average cost method," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 140-149, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Multi-choice games; Sharing values; Harsanyi set;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:wpaper:hal-04018735. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.