IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/matsoc/v46y2003i3p261-265.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Some further remark on the core structure of the assignment game

Author

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Sotomayor, Marilda, 2003. "Some further remark on the core structure of the assignment game," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 261-265, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:46:y:2003:i:3:p:261-265
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-4896(03)00067-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Leonard, Herman B, 1983. "Elicitation of Honest Preferences for the Assignment of Individuals to Positions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(3), pages 461-479, June.
    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. Daniel Jaume & Jordi Massó & Alejandro Neme, 2012. "The multiple-partners assignment game with heterogeneous sales and multi-unit demands: competitive equilibria," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 76(2), pages 161-187, October.
    2. Heinrich H. Nax & Bary S. R. Pradelski & H. Peyton Young, 2013. "The Evolution of Core Stability in Decentralized Matching Markets," Working Papers 2013.50, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    3. Luis Guardiola & Ana Meca & Justo Puerto, 2020. "Quid Pro Quo allocations in Production-Inventory games," Papers 2002.00953, arXiv.org.
    4. David Pérez-Castrillo & Marilda Sotomayor, 2017. "On the manipulability of competitive equilibrium rules in many-to-many buyer–seller markets," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(4), pages 1137-1161, November.
    5. Sotomayor, Marilda, 2007. "Connecting the cooperative and competitive structures of the multiple-partners assignment game," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 155-174, May.
    6. Heinrich Nax & Bary Pradelski, 2015. "Evolutionary dynamics and equitable core selection in assignment games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(4), pages 903-932, November.
    7. Núñez, Marina & Rafels, Carles, 2008. "On the dimension of the core of the assignment game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 290-302, September.
    8. Nax, Heinrich H. & Pradelski, Bary S. R., 2015. "Evolutionary dynamics and equitable core selection in assignment games," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 65428, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Bettina Klaus & Frédéric Payot, 2013. "Paths to Stability in the Assignment Problem," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 13.14, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    10. 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.
    11. Drechsel, J. & Kimms, A., 2010. "Computing core allocations in cooperative games with an application to cooperative procurement," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(1), pages 310-321, November.
    12. Luis A. Guardiola & Ana Meca & Justo Puerto, 2021. "Enforcing fair cooperation in production-inventory settings with heterogeneous agents," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 305(1), pages 59-80, October.
    13. Adegbesan, Tunji, 2007. "Strategic factor markets: Bargaining, scarcity, and resource complementarity," IESE Research Papers D/666, IESE Business School.

    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. Andersson, Tommy & Andersson, Christer & Andersson, Ola, 2010. "Sealed Bid Auctions vs. Ascending Bid Auctions: An Experimental Study," Working Papers 2010:17, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    2. Mishra, Debasis & Parkes, David C., 2007. "Ascending price Vickrey auctions for general valuations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 335-366, January.
    3. Nunez, Marina & Rafels, Carles, 2003. "Characterization of the extreme core allocations of the assignment game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 311-331, August.
    4. Frank Kelly & Peter Key & Neil Walton, 2016. "Efficient Advert Assignment," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 822-837, August.
    5. Blume, Lawrence E. & Easley, David & Kleinberg, Jon & Tardos, Éva, 2009. "Trading networks with price-setting agents," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 36-50, September.
    6. Yu Zhou & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2019. "Minimum price equilibrium in the assignment market," ISER Discussion Paper 1047, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    7. Marina Núñez & Tamás Solymosi, 2017. "Lexicographic allocations and extreme core payoffs: the case of assignment games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 254(1), pages 211-234, July.
    8. Roth, Alvin E., 1985. "Common and conflicting interests in two-sided matching markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 75-96, February.
    9. Ata Atay & Eric Bahel & Tamás Solymosi, 2023. "Matching markets with middlemen under transferable utility," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 322(2), pages 539-563, March.
    10. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Ostroy, Joseph M., 2002. "The Package Assignment Model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 377-406, December.
    11. van der Laan, G. & Talman, Dolf & Yang, Z., 2018. "Equilibrium in the Assignment Market under Budget Constraints," Discussion Paper 2018-046, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    12. Jens Josephson & Joel Shapiro, 2008. "Interviews and adverse selection," Economics Working Papers 1093, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    13. Yu Zhou & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2016. "Strategy-Proofness and Efficiency for Non-quasi-linear Common-Tiered-Object Preferences: Characterization of Minimum Price Rule," ISER Discussion Paper 0971, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    14. Xia, Mu & Koehler, Gary J. & Whinston, Andrew B., 2004. "Pricing combinatorial auctions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(1), pages 251-270, April.
    15. Gerard van der Laan & Zaifu Yang, 2016. "An ascending multi-item auction with financially constrained bidders," The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York, vol. 1(1), pages 109-149, December.
    16. Ma, Jinpeng, 1998. "Competitive Equilibrium with Indivisibilities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 458-468, October.
    17. Satoru Fujishige & Zaifu Yang, 2020. "A Universal Dynamic Auction for Unimodular Demand Types: An Efficient Auction Design for Various Kinds of Indivisible Commodities," Discussion Papers 20/08, Department of Economics, University of York.
    18. David Pérez-Castrillo & Marilda Sotomayor, 2013. "Two Folk Manipulability Theorems In The General One-To-Two-Sided Matching Markets With Money," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2013_01, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    19. Yuji Fujinaka & Takuma Wakayama, 2011. "Secure implementation in Shapley–Scarf housing markets," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(1), pages 147-169, September.
    20. Zhiling Guo & Gary J. Koehler & Andrew B. Whinston, 2012. "A Computational Analysis of Bundle Trading Markets Design for Distributed Resource Allocation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(3-part-1), pages 823-843, September.

    More about this item

    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:matsoc:v:46:y:2003:i:3:p:261-265. 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/505565 .

    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.