IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v250y2016i2p555-565.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cooperation among agents with a proximity relation

Author

Listed:
  • Fernández, J.R.
  • Gallego, I.
  • Jiménez-Losada, A.
  • Ordóñez, M.

Abstract

A cooperative game consists of a set of players and a characteristic function determining the maximal gain or minimal cost that every subset of players can achieve when they decide to cooperate, regardless of the actions that the other players take. The relationships of closeness among the players should modify the bargaining among them and therefore their payoffs. The first models that have studied this closeness used a priori unions or undirected graphs. In the a priori union model a partition of the big coalition is supposed. Each element of the partition represents a group of players with the same interests. The groups negotiate among them to form the grand coalition and later, inside each one, players bargain among them. Now we propose to use proximity relations to represent leveled closeness of the interests among the players and extending the a priori unions model.

Suggested Citation

  • Fernández, J.R. & Gallego, I. & Jiménez-Losada, A. & Ordóñez, M., 2016. "Cooperation among agents with a proximity relation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 555-565.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:250:y:2016:i:2:p:555-565
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.09.029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221715008711
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.09.029?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. De Waegenaere, Anja & Wakker, Peter P., 2001. "Nonmonotonic Choquet integrals," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 45-60, September.
    2. Tsurumi, Masayo & Tanino, Tetsuzo & Inuiguchi, Masahiro, 2001. "A Shapley function on a class of cooperative fuzzy games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(3), pages 596-618, March.
    3. Roger B. Myerson, 1977. "Graphs and Cooperation in Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 225-229, August.
    4. Jiménez-Losada, Andrés & Fernández, Julio R. & Ordóñez, Manuel & Grabisch, Michel, 2010. "Games on fuzzy communication structures with Choquet players," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 836-847, December.
    5. Jean-Pierre Aubin, 1981. "Cooperative Fuzzy Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 1-13, February.
    6. AUMANN, Robert J. & DREZE, Jacques H., 1974. "Cooperative games with coalition structures," LIDAM Reprints CORE 217, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    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. M. G. Fiestras-Janeiro & I. García-Jurado & A. Meca & M. A. Mosquera, 2020. "On benefits of cooperation under strategic power," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 288(1), pages 285-306, May.
    2. Stefani, Silvana & Ausloos, Marcel & González-Concepción, Concepción & Sonubi, Adeyemi & Gil-Fariña, Ma Candelaria & Pestano-Gabino, Celina & Moretto, Enrico, 2021. "Competing or collaborating, with no symmetrical behaviour: Leadership opportunities and winning strategies under stability," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 489-504.

    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. C. Manuel & D. Martín, 2021. "A value for communication situations with players having different bargaining abilities," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 301(1), pages 161-182, June.
    2. J. R. Fernández & I. Gallego & A. Jiménez-Losada & M. Ordóñez, 2019. "The cg-average tree value for games on cycle-free fuzzy communication structures," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 27(3), pages 456-478, October.
    3. Conrado M. Manuel & Daniel Martín, 2020. "A Monotonic Weighted Shapley Value," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 627-654, August.
    4. Conrado M. Manuel & Daniel Martín, 2021. "A Monotonic Weighted Banzhaf Value for Voting Games," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-23, June.
    5. Tido Takeng, Rodrigue, 2022. "Uncertain production environment and communication structure," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    6. Antonio Magaña & Francesc Carreras, 2018. "Coalition Formation and Stability," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 467-502, June.
    7. Sylvain Béal & Mostapha Diss & Rodrigue Tido Takeng, 2024. "New axiomatizations of the Diversity Owen and Shapley values," Working Papers 2024-09, CRESE.
    8. Brânzei, R. & Dimitrov, D.A. & Tijs, S.H., 2002. "Convex Fuzzy Games and Participation Monotonic Allocation Schemes," Discussion Paper 2002-13, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    9. Tejada, O. & Álvarez-Mozos, M., 2018. "Graphs and (levels of) cooperation in games: Two ways how to allocate the surplus," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 114-122.
    10. Joosung Lee, 2015. "Multilateral Bargaining in Networks: On the Prevalence of Inefficiencies," Working Papers 2015.53, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    11. Sylvain Béal & Anna Khmelnitskaya & Philippe Solal, 2018. "Two-step values for games with two-level communication structure," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 563-587, February.
    12. Elena Parilina & Artem Sedakov, 2016. "Stable Cooperation in a Game with a Major Player," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(02), pages 1-20, June.
    13. Caulier, Jean-François & Mauleon, Ana & Vannetelbosch, Vincent, 2015. "Allocation rules for coalitional network games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 80-88.
    14. Tobias Hiller, 2021. "Hierarchy and the size of a firm," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 68(3), pages 389-404, September.
    15. Julia Belau, 2011. "Outside Options In Probabilistic Coalition Situations," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(04), pages 417-442.
    16. van den Brink, J.R., 1999. "An Axiomatization of the Shapley Value Using a Fairness Property," Other publications TiSEM 0090365c-9bab-4367-b660-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. David Lowing, 2023. "Allocation rules for multi-choice games with a permission tree structure," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 320(1), pages 261-291, January.
    18. S. Béal & A. Lardon & E. Rémila & P. Solal, 2012. "The average tree solution for multi-choice forest games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 196(1), pages 27-51, July.
    19. René Brink & Anna Khmelnitskaya & Gerard Laan, 2016. "An Owen-type value for games with two-level communication structure," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 243(1), pages 179-198, August.
    20. Stefano Moretti & Fioravante Patrone, 2008. "Transversality of the Shapley value," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 16(1), pages 1-41, July.

    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:ejores:v:250:y:2016:i:2:p:555-565. 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/eor .

    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.