IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/120188.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On identifying efficient, fair and stable allocations in "generalized" sequencing games

Author

Listed:
  • Banerjee, Sreoshi

Abstract

We model sequencing problems as coalitional games and study the Shapley value and the non-emptiness of the core. The ”optimistic” cost of a coalition is its minimum waiting cost when the members are served first in an order. The ”pessimistic” cost of a coalition is its minimum waiting cost when the members are served last. We take the weighted average of the two extremes and define the class of ”weighted optimistic pessimistic (WOP)” cost games. If the weight is zero, we get the optimistic scenario and if it is one, we get the pessimistic scenario. We find a necessary and sufficient condition on the associated weights for the core to be non-empty. We also find a necessary and sufficient condition on these weights for the Shapley value to be an allocation in the core. We impose ”upper bounds” to protect agents against arbitrarily high disuilities from waiting. If an agent’s disutility level is his Shapley payoff from the WOP cost game, we find necessary and sufficient conditions on the upper bounds for the Shapley value to conform to them.

Suggested Citation

  • Banerjee, Sreoshi, 2024. "On identifying efficient, fair and stable allocations in "generalized" sequencing games," MPRA Paper 120188, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:120188
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/120188/1/MPRA_paper_120188.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kar, Anirban & Mitra, Manipushpak & Mutuswami, Suresh, 2009. "On the coincidence of the prenucleolus and the Shapley value," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 16-25, January.
    2. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2017. "Reordering an existing queue," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(1), pages 65-87, June.
    3. Haim Mendelson & Seungjin Whang, 1990. "Optimal Incentive-Compatible Priority Pricing for the M/M/1 Queue," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 870-883, October.
    4. Alex Gershkov & Paul Schweinzer, 2010. "When queueing is better than push and shove," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(3), pages 409-430, July.
    5. Jeroen Suijs, 1996. "On incentive compatibility and budget balancedness in public decision making," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 2(1), pages 193-209, December.
    6. Parikshit De & Manipushpak Mitra, 2017. "Incentives and justice for sequencing problems," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 64(2), pages 239-264, August.
    7. Debasis Mishra & Bharath Rangarajan, 2007. "Cost sharing in a job scheduling problem," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 29(3), pages 369-382, October.
    8. Manipushpak Mitra, 2002. "Achieving the first best in sequencing problems," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 7(1), pages 75-91.
    9. Chun, Youngsub & Yengin, Duygu, 2017. "Welfare lower bounds and strategy-proofness in the queueing problem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 462-476.
    10. Wayne E. Smith, 1956. "Various optimizers for single‐stage production," Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1‐2), pages 59-66, March.
    11. Moulin, Herve, 1991. "Welfare bounds in the fair division problem," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 321-337, August.
    12. Hervé Moulin, 2007. "On Scheduling Fees to Prevent Merging, Splitting, and Transferring of Jobs," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 266-283, May.
    13. Maniquet, Francois, 2003. "A characterization of the Shapley value in queueing problems," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 90-103, March.
    14. Duygu Yengin, 2013. "Identical Preferences Lower Bound for Allocation of Heterogenous Tasks and NIMBY Problems," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 15(4), pages 580-601, August.
    15. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2014. "Egalitarian equivalence and strategyproofness in the queueing problem," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 425-442, June.
    16. KayI, Çagatay & Ramaekers, Eve, 2010. "Characterizations of Pareto-efficient, fair, and strategy-proof allocation rules in queueing problems," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 220-232, January.
    17. Chun, Youngsub, 2006. "A pessimistic approach to the queueing problem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 171-181, March.
    18. Chun, Youngsub & Mitra, Manipushpak & Mutuswami, Suresh, 2019. "Egalitarianism in the queueing problem," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 48-56.
    19. Youngsub Chun, 2006. "No-envy in queueing problems," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 29(1), pages 151-162, September.
    20. Robert J. Dolan, 1978. "Incentive Mechanisms for Priority Queuing Problems," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 421-436, Autumn.
    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. Banerjee, Sreoshi, 2023. "Stability and fairness in sequencing games: optimistic approach and pessimistic scenarios," MPRA Paper 118680, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Banerjee, Sreoshi & De, Parikshit & Mitra, Manipushpak, 2020. "A welfarist approach to sequencing problems with incentives," MPRA Paper 107188, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2019. "Recent developments in the queueing problem," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 27(1), pages 1-23, April.
    4. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2023. "Balanced VCG mechanisms for sequencing problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 60(1), pages 35-46, January.
    5. Parikshit De & Manipushpak Mitra, 2017. "Incentives and justice for sequencing problems," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 64(2), pages 239-264, August.
    6. Ju, Yuan & Chun, Youngsub & van den Brink, René, 2014. "Auctioning and selling positions: A non-cooperative approach to queueing conflicts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 33-45.
    7. Kazuhiko Hashimoto & Hiroki Saitoh, 2012. "Strategy-proof and anonymous rule in queueing problems: a relationship between equity and efficiency," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(3), pages 473-480, March.
    8. Yengin, Duygu & Chun, Youngsub, 2020. "No-envy, solidarity, and strategy-proofness in the queueing problem," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 87-97.
    9. Chun, Youngsub & Yengin, Duygu, 2017. "Welfare lower bounds and strategy-proofness in the queueing problem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 462-476.
    10. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2017. "Reordering an existing queue," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(1), pages 65-87, June.
    11. Chun, Youngsub & Mitra, Manipushpak & Mutuswami, Suresh, 2019. "Egalitarianism in the queueing problem," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 48-56.
    12. Chun, Youngsub & Mitra, Manipushpak, 2014. "Subgroup additivity in the queueing problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(1), pages 281-289.
    13. René Brink & Youngsub Chun, 2012. "Balanced consistency and balanced cost reduction for sequencing problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(3), pages 519-529, March.
    14. Bloch, Francis, 2017. "Second-best mechanisms in queuing problems without transfers:The role of random priorities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 73-79.
    15. Kazuhiko Hashimoto & Hiroki Saitoh, 2008. "Strategy-Proof and Anonymous Rule in Queueing Problems: A Relationship between Equity and Efficiency," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 08-17, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    16. Conan Mukherjee, 2013. "Weak group strategy-proof and queue-efficient mechanisms for the queueing problem with multiple machines," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(1), pages 131-163, February.
    17. Chun, Youngsub & Mitra, Manipushpak & Mutuswami, Suresh, 2019. "A characterization of the symmetrically balanced VCG rule in the queueing problem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 486-490.
    18. Sambuddha Ghosh & Yan Long & Manipushpak Mitra, 2021. "Prior-free online mechanisms for queueing with arrivals," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 72(2), pages 671-700, September.
    19. Hervé Moulin, 2007. "On Scheduling Fees to Prevent Merging, Splitting, and Transferring of Jobs," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 266-283, May.
    20. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2014. "Egalitarian equivalence and strategyproofness in the queueing problem," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 425-442, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Sequencing; disutility upper bounds; core; cooperative game; Shapley value;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:120188. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.