IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01091714.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The three wives problem and Shapley value

Author

Listed:
  • Louis de Mesnard

    (CREGO - Centre de Recherche en Gestion des Organisations (EA 7317) - UB - Université de Bourgogne - UFC - Université de Franche-Comté - UBFC - Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté [COMUE])

Abstract

We examine the Talmudic three wives problem, which is a generalization of the Talmudic contested garment problem solved by Aumann and Maschler (1985) using coalitional procedure. This problem has many practical applications. In an attempt to unify all Talmudic methods, Guiasu (2010, 2011) asserts that it can be explained in terms of "run-to-the-bank", that is, of Shapley value in a "cumulative game". It can be challenged because the coalitional procedure yields the same result as the nucleolus, which corresponds to a "dual game". As Guiasu's solution is paradoxical (it has all the appearances of truth), my contribution consists in explaining the concepts, particularly truncation, that play a central role in the demonstration, and then analyzing in what way Guiasu's argument is misleading. After recalling what the Talmudic division problem is, how it is solved by Aumann and Maschler's coalitional procedure (i.e., the nucleolus or the Shapley value of the dual game), and how Guiasu solves it by the Shapley value of a cumulative game, I show that (i) Guiasu omitted to truncate the data (claims exceeding the value of the estate must be reduced to the available level of estate), while truncation is required in the context. (ii) He attributes the surplus (obtained after sharing out the estate) to all applicants equally: this contradicts the contested garment solution. (iii) This implies that the estate cannot exceed the greatest claim, which is obviously false. (iv) Guiasu's approach violates the axiom of continuity of payoffs. I conclude that Guiasu's attempt to explain the three wives problem in terms of "run-to-the-bank" is unsuccessful and actually contradicts the contested garment problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Louis de Mesnard, 2015. "The three wives problem and Shapley value," Post-Print hal-01091714, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01091714
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01091714v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01091714v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Villar, Antonio, 2004. "The Talmud rule and the securement of agents' awards," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 245-257, March.
    2. Kristof Bosmans & Luc Lauwers, 2011. "Lorenz comparisons of nine rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 40(4), pages 791-807, November.
    3. H. Peyton Young, 1987. "On Dividing an Amount According to Individual Claims or Liabilities," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 398-414, August.
    4. Dagan, Nir & Serrano, Roberto & Volij, Oscar, 1997. "A Noncooperative View of Consistent Bankruptcy Rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 55-72, January.
    5. Moulin, Herve, 2002. "Axiomatic cost and surplus sharing," 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 6, pages 289-357, Elsevier.
    6. Benoit, Jean-Pierre, 1997. "The Nucleolus is Contested-Garment-Consistent: A Direct Proof," Working Papers 97-12, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    7. Robert Aumann, 2010. "Some non-superadditive games, and their Shapley values, in the Talmud," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(1), pages 3-10, March.
    8. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
    9. SCHMEIDLER, David, 1969. "The nucleolus of a characteristic function game," LIDAM Reprints CORE 44, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    10. S. C. Littlechild & G. Owen, 1973. "A Simple Expression for the Shapley Value in a Special Case," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 370-372, November.
    11. Toru Hokari & William Thomson, 2003. "Claims problems and weighted generalizations of the Talmud rule," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 21(2), pages 241-261, March.
    12. Benoit, Jean-Pierre, 1997. "The Nucleolus Is Contested-Garment-Consistent: A Direct Proof," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 192-196, November.
    13. K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), 2002. "Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    14. Tijs, S.H., 2005. "The First Steps with Alexia, the Average Lexicographic Value," Discussion Paper 2005-123, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    15. Diego Dominguez & William Thomson, 2006. "A new solution to the problem of adjudicating conflicting claims," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 28(2), pages 283-307, June.
    16. Tijs, S.H., 2005. "The First Steps with Alexia, the Average Lexicographic Value," Other publications TiSEM 0b4f9565-59f7-477f-b8f8-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. S. Z. Alparslan Gök & A. Sarıarslan, 2012. "On the Bankruptcy Situations and the Alexia Value," Journal of Applied Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2012, pages 1-7, August.
    18. Herrero, Carmen & Villar, Antonio, 2001. "The three musketeers: four classical solutions to bankruptcy problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 307-328, November.
    19. Aumann, Robert J. & Maschler, Michael, 1985. "Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 195-213, August.
    20. M. Maschler & B. Peleg & L. S. Shapley, 1979. "Geometric Properties of the Kernel, Nucleolus, and Related Solution Concepts," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 303-338, November.
    21. Arin, Javier & Inarra, Elena, 1998. "A Characterization of the Nucleolus for Convex Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 12-24, April.
    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. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.
    2. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & M. Marco-Gil, 2014. "A new approach for bounding awards in bankruptcy problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(2), pages 447-469, August.
    3. De MESNARD, Louis, 2008. "On the Talmud division : equity and robustness," LEG - Document de travail - Economie 2008-07, LEG, Laboratoire d'Economie et de Gestion, CNRS, Université de Bourgogne.
    4. Giménez-Gómez, José-Manuel & Peris, Josep E., 2014. "A proportional approach to claims problems with a guaranteed minimum," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 109-116.
    5. Sanchez-Soriano, Joaquin, 2021. "Families of sequential priority rules and random arrival rules with withdrawal limits," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 136-148.
    6. Peris, Josep E. & Jiménez-Gómez, José M., 2012. "A Proportional Approach to Bankruptcy Problems with a guaranteed minimum," QM&ET Working Papers 12-7, University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory.
    7. Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Villar, Antonio, 2004. "The Talmud rule and the securement of agents' awards," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 245-257, March.
    8. Jens Hougaard & Juan Moreno-Ternero & Lars Østerdal, 2013. "Rationing in the presence of baselines," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(4), pages 1047-1066, April.
    9. Hokari, Toru & Thomson, William, 2008. "On properties of division rules lifted by bilateral consistency," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(11), pages 1057-1071, December.
    10. María José Solíx-Baltodano & Cori Vilella & José Manuel Giménez-Gómez, 2019. "The Catalan Health Budget: A Conflicting Claims Approach," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 228(1), pages 35-54, March.
    11. Lipschütz Itay & Schwarz Mordechai E., 2020. "Fairness Vs. Economic Efficiency: Lessons from an Interdisciplinary Analysis of Talmudic Bankruptcy Law," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 16(3), pages 1-38, November.
    12. Yoichi Kasajima & Rodrigo Velez, 2011. "Reflecting inequality of claims in gains and losses," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 46(2), pages 283-295, February.
    13. Juan Moreno-Ternero & Antonio Villar, 2006. "The TAL-Family of Rules for Bankruptcy Problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(2), pages 231-249, October.
    14. Erik Ansink & Hans-Peter Weikard, 2012. "Sequential sharing rules for river sharing problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(2), pages 187-210, February.
    15. Hougaard, Jens Leth & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Østerdal, Lars Peter, 2012. "A unifying framework for the problem of adjudicating conflicting claims," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 107-114.
    16. Kristof Bosmans & Luc Lauwers, 2011. "Lorenz comparisons of nine rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 40(4), pages 791-807, November.
    17. Flores-Szwagrzak, Karol & Treibich, Rafael, 2025. "How much can you claim?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    18. Jaume García-Segarra & Miguel Ginés-Vilar, 2023. "Additive adjudication of conflicting claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(1), pages 93-116, March.
    19. Kristof Bosmans & Erik Schokkaert, 2009. "Equality preference in the claims problem: a questionnaire study of cuts in earnings and pensions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(4), pages 533-557, November.
    20. Carmen Herrero & Juan Moreno-Ternero & Giovanni Ponti, 2010. "On the adjudication of conflicting claims: an experimental study," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 34(1), pages 145-179, January.

    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:journl:hal-01091714. 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.