IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/psewpa/halshs-00687180.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A ranking method based on handicaps

Author

Listed:
  • Gabrielle Demange

    (PSE - Paris-Jourdan Sciences Economiques - ENS Paris - École normale supérieure - Paris - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, PSE - Paris School of Economics)

Abstract

Ranking systems are becoming a fundamental tool in many areas, including the Web environment for ranking pages. PageRank, the most popular method, is based on the links stemming from a page and defined so as to be immune to their inflation, a property called intensity-invariance. This paper introduces and characterizes a new intensity-invariant method, called the handicap-based method. The method assigns not only a ranking to the items but also weights to the experts on which the ranking is based. Ranking and weights form an equilibrium for a relationship based on the notion of handicaps. The method is, in a sense made precise in the paper, the counterpart of the counting method in environments that require intensity-invariance.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabrielle Demange, 2013. "A ranking method based on handicaps," PSE Working Papers halshs-00687180, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:psewpa:halshs-00687180
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00687180v3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00687180v3/document
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gabrielle Demange, 2012. "On the influence of a ranking system," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(2), pages 431-455, July.
    2. Giora Slutzki & Oscar Volij, 2006. "Scoring of web pages and tournaments—axiomatizations," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 26(1), pages 75-92, January.
    3. M. L. Balinski & G. Demange, 1989. "An Axiomatic Approach to Proportionality Between Matrices," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 700-719, November.
    4. de Clippel, Geoffroy & Moulin, Herve & Tideman, Nicolaus, 2008. "Impartial division of a dollar," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 176-191, March.
    5. Liebowitz, S J & Palmer, J P, 1984. "Assessing the Relative Impacts of Economic Journals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 77-88, March.
    6. Woeginger, Gerhard J., 2008. "An axiomatic characterization of the Hirsch-index," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 224-232, September.
    7. AMIR, Rabah, 2002. "Impact-adjusted citations as a measure of journal quality," CORE Discussion Papers 2002074, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    8. van den Brink, René & Gilles, Robert P., 2009. "The outflow ranking method for weighted directed graphs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 193(2), pages 484-491, March.
    9. Leo Katz, 1953. "A new status index derived from sociometric analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 18(1), pages 39-43, March.
    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. Sprumont, Yves, 2018. "Ranking by rating," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(1), January.
    2. René Van den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2017. "The degree measure as utility function over positions in networks," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-01592181, HAL.
    3. Nicolas CARAYOL & Agenor LAHATTE, 2014. "Dominance relations and ranking when quantity and quality both matter: Applications to US universities and econ. departments worldwide," Cahiers du GREThA 2014-14, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée.
    4. Demange, Gabrielle, 2017. "Mutual rankings," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 35-42.
    5. Rene (J.R.) van den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2017. "The Degree Measure as Utility Function over Positions in Networks," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 17-065/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    6. Dequiedt, Vianney & Zenou, Yves, 2017. "Local and consistent centrality measures in parameterized networks," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 28-36.
    7. Flores-Szwagrzak, Karol & Treibich, Rafael, 2015. "Co-authorship and the Measurement of Individual Productivity," Discussion Papers of Business and Economics 17/2015, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Business and Economics.
    8. René van den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2017. "The degree measure as utility function over positions in networks," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 17035, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    9. Gabrielle Demange, 2016. "Mutual rankings," Working Papers halshs-01353825, HAL.
    10. Lutz Bornmann & Alexander Butz & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2018. "What are the top five journals in economics? A new meta-ranking," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(6), pages 659-675, February.
    11. Palacios-Huerta, Ignacio & Volij, Oscar, 2014. "Axiomatic measures of intellectual influence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 85-90.
    12. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2016. "Ranking authors using fractional counting of citations: An axiomatic approach," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 183-199.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Ranking; Scores; Invariant Method; Peers Method; Handicap; Scaling Matrix;

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D89 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Other

    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:hal:psewpa:halshs-00687180. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CCSD). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.