IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v16y2025i5p41-d1731908.html

Power Indices with Threats in Precoalitions

Author

Listed:
  • Jochen Staudacher

    (Fakultät Informatik, Hochschule Kempten, 87435 Kempten, Germany)

Abstract

We investigate power indices for simple games with precoalitions which distribute power among players in an external and an internal step. We extend an existing approach which uses the Public Good index both on the external level in the quotient game as well as on the internal level for measuring the leverage of players to threaten their peers through departing the precoalition. We replace the Public Good index in that model by five other efficient power indices, i.e., the Shapley–Shubik index, the Deegan–Packel index, the Johnston index and two indices based on null player free winning coalitions. Axiomatizations of the novel power indices with threat partitions are presented. We also propose a slight modification to the existing framework for threat power indices which guarantees that null players are always assigned zero power. Numerical results for all power indices combined with different threat partitions are presented and discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Jochen Staudacher, 2025. "Power Indices with Threats in Precoalitions," Games, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-23, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:16:y:2025:i:5:p:41-:d:1731908
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/16/5/41/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/16/5/41/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jochen Staudacher, 2023. "Computing the Public Good Index for Weighted Voting Games with Precoalitions Using Dynamic Programming," Springer Books, in: Martin A. Leroch & Florian Rupp (ed.), Power and Responsibility, pages 107-124, Springer.
    2. Chakravarty,Satya R. & Mitra,Manipushpak & Sarkar,Palash, 2015. "A Course on Cooperative Game Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107058798, January.
    3. Cesarino Bertini & Josep Freixas & Gianfranco Gambarelli & Izabella Stach, 2013. "Comparing Power Indices," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 1-19.
    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. Somdeb Lahiri, 2021. "Pattanaik's axioms and the existence of winners preferred with probability at least half," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 31(2), pages 109-122.
    2. Izabella Stach, 2022. "Reformulation of Public Help Index θ Using Null Player Free Winning Coalitions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 317-334, April.
    3. Athanasios Kehagias, 2023. "On the Nash Equilibria of a Duel with Terminal Payoffs," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-12, September.
    4. Guillaume Sekli & Alexandre Chirat, 2022. "Assessing the credibility and fairness of international corporate tax rate harmonization via cooperative game theory," Working Papers hal-04222311, HAL.
    5. Sanjay Bhattacherjee & Satya R. Chakravarty & Palash Sarkar, 2025. "A general model for multi-parameter weighted voting games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 54(1), pages 1-36, June.
    6. Hermida-Rivera, Héctor, 2025. "Minimal stable voting rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 541-553.
    7. Bhattacherjee, Sanjay & Sarkar, Palash, 2017. "Correlation and inequality in weighted majority voting games," MPRA Paper 83168, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Bhattacherjee, Sanjay & Sarkar, Palash, 2018. "Voting in the Goods and Service Tax Council of India," MPRA Paper 86239, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Qianqian Kong & Hans Peters, 2021. "An issue based power index," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 50(1), pages 23-38, March.
    10. Izabella Stach & Jacek Mercik, 2021. "Measurement of control power in corporate networks," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 31(1), pages 97-121.
    11. Sanjay Bhattacherjee & Palash Sarkar, 2021. "Weighted voting procedure having a unique blocker," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 50(1), pages 279-295, March.
    12. Alex Lord & Philip O’Brien, 2017. "What price planning? Reimagining planning as “market maker”," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 217-232, April.
    13. Satya R. Chakravarty & Palash Sarkar, 2022. "Inequality minimising subsidy and taxation," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 10(1), pages 53-67, May.
    14. Izabella Stach & Jacek Mercik, 2021. "Measurement of control power in corporate networks," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 31, pages 97-121.
    15. Karos, Dominik & Peters, Hans, 2018. "Effectivity and power," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 363-378.
    16. Matt Van Essen & John Wooders, 2023. "Dual auctions for assigning winners and compensating losers," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1069-1114, November.
    17. Aleksei Y. Kondratev & Vladimir V. Mazalov, 2020. "Tournament solutions based on cooperative game theory," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(1), pages 119-145, March.
    18. André Casajus & Frank Huettner, 2019. "The Coleman–Shapley index: being decisive within the coalition of the interested," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 181(3), pages 275-289, December.
    19. Jin, Xuefeng & Park, Kang Tae & Kim, Kap Hwan, 2019. "Storage space sharing among container handling companies," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 111-131.
    20. Jochen Staudacher & Johannes Anwander, 2019. "Conditions for the uniqueness of the Gately point for cooperative games," Papers 1901.01485, arXiv.org.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jgames:v:16:y:2025:i:5:p:41-:d:1731908. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.