IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v103y2017icp254-261.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Choosing k from m: Feasible elimination procedures reconsidered

Author

Listed:
  • Peleg, Bezalel
  • Peters, Hans

Abstract

We show that feasible elimination procedures (Peleg, 1978) can be used to select k from m alternatives. An important advantage of this method is the core property: no coalition can guarantee an outcome that is preferred by all its members. We also show that the problem of determining whether a specific k-tuple can result from a feasible elimination procedure is computationally equivalent to the problem of finding a maximal matching in a bipartite graph.

Suggested Citation

  • Peleg, Bezalel & Peters, Hans, 2017. "Choosing k from m: Feasible elimination procedures reconsidered," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 254-261.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:103:y:2017:i:c:p:254-261
    DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2015.12.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825615001657
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.geb.2015.12.008?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peleg, Bezalel & Peters, Hans, 2017. "Feasible elimination procedures in social choice: An axiomatic characterization," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 43-50.
    2. Bezalel Peleg & Hans Peters, 2010. "Consistent voting systems with a continuum of voters," Studies in Choice and Welfare, in: Strategic Social Choice, chapter 0, pages 123-145, Springer.
    3. Bezalel Peleg & Hans Peters, 2010. "Strategic Social Choice," Studies in Choice and Welfare, Springer, number 978-3-642-13875-1, June.
    4. Brams, Steven J. & Fishburn, Peter C., 2002. "Voting procedures," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 4, pages 173-236, Elsevier.
    5. Holzman, Ron, 1986. "On strong representations of games by social choice functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 39-57, February.
    6. Oren, Ishai, 1981. "The structure of exactly strongly consistent social choice functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 207-220, October.
    7. Eric Maskin, 1999. "Nash Equilibrium and Welfare Optimality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(1), pages 23-38.
    8. Satterthwaite, Mark Allen, 1975. "Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 187-217, April.
    9. Dutta, Bhaskar & Pattanaik, Prasanta K, 1978. "On Nicely Consistent Voting Systems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 163-170, January.
    10. Peleg, Bezalel, 1978. "Consistent Voting Systems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 153-161, January.
    11. Gibbard, Allan, 1973. "Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 587-601, July.
    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. Robert J. Aumann, 2019. "My scientific first-born: a clarification," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(3), pages 999-1000, September.
    2. Aziz, Haris & Lee, Barton E., 2022. "A characterization of proportionally representative committees," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 248-255.

    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. Bezalel Peleg, 2013. "Consistent Voting Systems Revisited: Computation and Axiomatic Characterization," Discussion Paper Series dp649, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    2. Bezalel Peleg & Ron Holzman, 2017. "Representations of Political Power Structures by Strategically Stable Game Forms: A Survey," Games, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Peleg, Bezalel & Peters, Hans, 2017. "Feasible elimination procedures in social choice: An axiomatic characterization," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 43-50.
    4. Dominique Lepelley & Boniface Mbih, 1997. "Strategic Manipulation in Committees Using the Plurality Rule: Alternative Concepts and Frequency Calculations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 119-138, March.
    5. Jain, Satish, 2020. "The Strong Consistency of Neutral and Monotonic Binary Social Decision Rules," MPRA Paper 109657, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Keiding, Hans & Peleg, Bezalel, 2001. "Stable voting procedures for committees in economic environments," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 117-140, November.
    7. Mizukami, Hideki & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Wakayama, Takuma, 2003. "Strategy-Proof Sharing," Working Papers 1170, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    8. Bezalel Peleg & Hans Peters, 2010. "Consistent voting systems with a continuum of voters," Studies in Choice and Welfare, in: Strategic Social Choice, chapter 0, pages 123-145, Springer.
    9. McLennan, Andrew, 2011. "Manipulation in elections with uncertain preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 370-375.
    10. Hiroki Saitoh, 2022. "Characterization of tie-breaking plurality rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(1), pages 139-173, July.
    11. Kentaro Hatsumi & Dolors Berga & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2014. "A maximal domain for strategy-proof and no-vetoer rules in the multi-object choice model," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 43(1), pages 153-168, February.
    12. Cato, Susumu, 2011. "Maskin monotonicity and infinite individuals," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 56-59, January.
    13. Maskin, Eric & Sjostrom, Tomas, 2002. "Implementation theory," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare,in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 5, pages 237-288 Elsevier.
    14. Sanver, M. Remzi, 2008. "Nash implementability of the plurality rule over restricted domains," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 298-300, May.
    15. Gardner, Roy, 1979. "Onymous Consistent Voting Systems," ISU General Staff Papers 197903010800001088, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    16. William Thomson, 2007. "Children Crying at Birthday Parties. Why?," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 31(3), pages 501-521, June.
    17. Mukherjee, Saptarshi & Muto, Nozomu & Ramaekers, Eve & Sen, Arunava, 2019. "Implementation in undominated strategies by bounded mechanisms: The Pareto correspondence and a generalization," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 229-243.
    18. Marek Pycia & M. Utku Ünver, 2021. "Arrovian Efficiency and Auditability in Discrete Mechanism Design," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 1044, Boston College Department of Economics.
    19. Amorós, Pablo, 2023. "Evaluation and strategic manipulation," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    20. Diss, Mostapha & Doghmi, Ahmed & Tlidi, Abdelmonaim, 2016. "Strategy proofness and unanimity in many-to-one matching markets," MPRA Paper 75927, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 08 Dec 2016.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Feasible elimination procedure; Choosing k from m; Axiomatization; Computation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations

    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:103:y:2017:i:c:p:254-261. 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.