IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/mateco/v46y2010i1p1-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recognizing one-dimensional Euclidean preference profiles

Author

Listed:
  • Knoblauch, Vicki

Abstract

A preference profile has a one-dimensional Euclidean representation if it can be derived from an arrangement of individuals and alternatives on a line, with each individual preferring the nearer of each pair of alternatives. We provide a polynomial-time algorithm that determines whether a given preference profile has a one-dimensional Euclidean representation and, if so, constructs one. This result has electoral and mechanism design applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Knoblauch, Vicki, 2010. "Recognizing one-dimensional Euclidean preference profiles," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 1-5, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:mateco:v:46:y:2010:i:1:p:1-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304-4068(09)00061-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eguia, Jon X., 2011. "Foundations of spatial preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 200-205, March.
    2. Bogomolnaia, Anna & Laslier, Jean-Francois, 2007. "Euclidean preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 87-98, February.
    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. Smeulders, B., 2018. "Testing a mixture model of single-peaked preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 101-113.
    2. Azrieli, Yaron, 2011. "Axioms for Euclidean preferences with a valence dimension," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 545-553.
    3. Edith Elkind & Piotr Faliszewski & Piotr Skowron, 2020. "A characterization of the single-peaked single-crossing domain," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(1), pages 167-181, January.
    4. Chambers, Christopher P. & Echenique, Federico, 2020. "Spherical preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    5. Jiehua Chen & Martin Nollenburg & Sofia Simola & Anais Villedieu & Markus Wallinger, 2022. "Multidimensional Manhattan Preferences," Papers 2201.09691, arXiv.org.
    6. Jiehua Chen & Kirk R. Pruhs & Gerhard J. Woeginger, 2017. "The one-dimensional Euclidean domain: finitely many obstructions are not enough," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(2), pages 409-432, February.
    7. Eguia, Jon X., 2011. "Foundations of spatial preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 200-205, March.
    8. Bredereck, Robert & Chen, Jiehua & Woeginger, Gerhard J., 2016. "Are there any nicely structured preference profiles nearby?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 61-73.
    9. Jon Eguia, 2013. "On the spatial representation of preference profiles," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(1), pages 103-128, January.
    10. Jiehua Chen & Sven Grottke, 2021. "Small one-dimensional Euclidean preference profiles," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(1), pages 117-144, July.
    11. Bruno Escoffier & Olivier Spanjaard & Magdaléna Tydrichová, 2024. "Euclidean preferences in the plane under $$\varvec{\ell _1},$$ ℓ 1 , $$\varvec{\ell _2}$$ ℓ 2 and $$\varvec{\ell _\infty }$$ ℓ ∞ norms," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 63(1), pages 125-169, August.
    12. Marie-Louise Lackner & Martin Lackner, 2017. "On the likelihood of single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(4), pages 717-745, April.

    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. Chambers, Christopher P. & Echenique, Federico, 2020. "Spherical preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    2. Naveen Durvasula, 2022. "Utility-Based Communication Requirements for Stable Matching in Large Markets," Papers 2212.04024, arXiv.org.
    3. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Resce, Giuliano & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2020. "Measuring well-being by a multidimensional spatial model in OECD Better Life Index framework," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    4. Azrieli, Yaron, 2011. "Axioms for Euclidean preferences with a valence dimension," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 545-553.
    5. Marc Henry & Ismael Mourifié, 2013. "Euclidean Revealed Preferences: Testing The Spatial Voting Model," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 650-666, June.
    6. ,, 2010. "Rationalizable voting," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 5(1), January.
    7. Arwa Khannoussi & Antoine Rolland & Julien Velcin, 2025. "A multidimensional spatial model for preference representation in multi-criteria group decision aiding," 4OR, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 163-191, June.
    8. Eguia, Jon X., 2011. "Foundations of spatial preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 200-205, March.
    9. Gershkov, Alex & Moldovanu, Benny & Shi, Xianwen, 2020. "Monotonic norms and orthogonal issues in multidimensional voting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    10. Gonczarowski, Yannai A. & Nisan, Noam & Ostrovsky, Rafail & Rosenbaum, Will, 2019. "A stable marriage requires communication," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 626-647.
    11. Scott Moser & John W. Patty & Elizabeth Maggie Penn, 2009. "The Structure of Heresthetical Power," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 139-159, April.
    12. Martínez-Mora Francisco & Puy M. Socorro, 2012. "Asymmetric Single-peaked Preferences," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, December.
    13. Jiehua Chen & Martin Nollenburg & Sofia Simola & Anais Villedieu & Markus Wallinger, 2022. "Multidimensional Manhattan Preferences," Papers 2201.09691, arXiv.org.
    14. Jiehua Chen & Kirk R. Pruhs & Gerhard J. Woeginger, 2017. "The one-dimensional Euclidean domain: finitely many obstructions are not enough," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(2), pages 409-432, February.
    15. Jiehua Chen & Sven Grottke, 2021. "Small one-dimensional Euclidean preference profiles," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(1), pages 117-144, July.
    16. Bruno Escoffier & Olivier Spanjaard & Magdaléna Tydrichová, 2024. "Euclidean preferences in the plane under $$\varvec{\ell _1},$$ ℓ 1 , $$\varvec{\ell _2}$$ ℓ 2 and $$\varvec{\ell _\infty }$$ ℓ ∞ norms," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 63(1), pages 125-169, August.
    17. Vicki Knoblauch, 2008. "Recognizing a Single-Issue Spatial Election," Working papers 2008-26, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    18. Andre Veski & Kaire Põder, 2016. "Strategies in the Tallinn School Choice Mechanism," Research in Economics and Business: Central and Eastern Europe, Tallinn School of Economics and Business Administration, Tallinn University of Technology, vol. 8(1).
    19. Eckert, Daniel & Klamler, Christian, 2010. "An equity-efficiency trade-off in a geometric approach to committee selection," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 386-391, September.
    20. Josue Ortega & Philipp Hergovich, 2017. "The Strength of Absent Ties: Social Integration via Online Dating," Papers 1709.10478, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2018.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    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:mateco:v:46:y:2010:i:1:p:1-5. 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/jmateco .

    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.