IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/matsoc/v68y2014icp1-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Shapley value without efficiency and additivity

Author

Listed:
  • Casajus, André

Abstract

We provide a new characterization of the Shapley value neither using the efficiency axiom nor the additivity axiom. In this characterization, efficiency is replaced by the gain-loss axiom (Einy and Haimanko, 2011), i.e., whenever the total worth generated does not change, a player can only gain at the expense of another one. Additivity and the equal treatment axiom are substituted by fairness (van den Brink, 2001) or differential marginality (Casajus, 2011), where the latter requires equal productivity differentials of two players to translate into equal payoff differentials. The third axiom of our characterization is the standard dummy player axiom.

Suggested Citation

  • Casajus, André, 2014. "The Shapley value without efficiency and additivity," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-4.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:68:y:2014:i:c:p:1-4
    DOI: 10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2013.12.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165489613001066
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2013.12.001?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. Sylvain Béal & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal, 2015. "Axioms of invariance for TU-games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(4), pages 891-902, November.
    2. Roth, Alvin, 2012. "The Shapley Value as a von Neumann-Morgenstern Utility," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 6, pages 1-9.
    3. André Casajus, 2011. "Differential marginality, van den Brink fairness, and the Shapley value," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 163-174, August.
    4. Gérard Hamiache, 2001. "Associated consistency and Shapley value," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 30(2), pages 279-289.
    5. 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).
    6. Blair, Douglas H. & McLean, Richard P., 1990. "Subjective evaluations of n-person games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 346-361, April.
    7. Hart, Sergiu & Mas-Colell, Andreu, 1989. "Potential, Value, and Consistency," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 589-614, May.
    8. Einy, Ezra & Haimanko, Ori, 2011. "Characterization of the Shapley–Shubik power index without the efficiency axiom," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 615-621.
    9. Yoshio Kamijo & Takumi Kongo, 2010. "Axiomatization of the Shapley value using the balanced cycle contributions property," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(4), pages 563-571, October.
    10. Ezra Einy, 1987. "Semivalues of Simple Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 185-192, May.
    11. Chun, Youngsub, 1989. "A new axiomatization of the shapley value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 119-130, June.
    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. Shan, Erfang & Cui, Zeguang & Lyu, Wenrong, 2023. "Gain–loss and new axiomatizations of the Shapley value," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    2. Bernardi Mauro & Roy Cerqueti & Arsen Palestini, 2016. "Allocation of risk capital in a cost cooperative game induced by a modified Expected Shortfall," Papers 1608.02365, arXiv.org.
    3. Ritu Dutta & Rajnish Kumnar & Surajit Borkotokey, 2023. "How to choose a Compatible Committee?," Papers 2308.03507, arXiv.org.
    4. de Clippel, Geoffroy, 2018. "Membership separability: A new axiomatization of the Shapley value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 125-129.
    5. Xun-Feng Hu, 2021. "New axiomatizations of the Owen value," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 93(3), pages 585-603, June.
    6. Takaaki Abe & Satoshi Nakada, 2019. "The weighted-egalitarian Shapley values," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(2), pages 197-213, February.
    7. Takaaki Abe & Satoshi Nakada, 2023. "Core stability of the Shapley value for cooperative games," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 60(4), pages 523-543, May.
    8. Giulia Bernardi & Josep Freixas, 2018. "The Shapley value analyzed under the Felsenthal and Machover bargaining model," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(3), pages 557-565, September.
    9. Ritu Dutta & Rajnish Kumar & Surajit Borkotokey, 2024. "How to choose a compatible committee?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 201(1), pages 181-198, October.
    10. Pedro Calleja & Francesc Llerena, 2019. "Path monotonicity, consistency and axiomatizations of some weighted solutions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(1), pages 287-310, March.

    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. de Clippel, Geoffroy, 2018. "Membership separability: A new axiomatization of the Shapley value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 125-129.
    2. Sylvain Béal & Marc Deschamps & Mostapha Diss & Rodrigue Tido Takeng, 2024. "Cooperative games with diversity constraints," Working Papers hal-04447373, HAL.
    3. repec:hal:journl:hal-04834011 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Oishi, Takayuki & Nakayama, Mikio & Hokari, Toru & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2016. "Duality and anti-duality in TU games applied to solutions, axioms, and axiomatizations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 44-53.
    5. C. Manuel & E. González-Arangüena & R. Brink, 2013. "Players indifferent to cooperate and characterizations of the Shapley value," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 77(1), pages 1-14, February.
    6. Casajus, André & Yokote, Koji, 2017. "Weak differential marginality and the Shapley value," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 274-284.
    7. Kongo, T. & Funaki, Y. & Tijs, S.H., 2007. "New Axiomatizations and an Implementation of the Shapley Value," Discussion Paper 2007-90, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    8. van den Brink, René & Pintér, Miklós, 2015. "On axiomatizations of the Shapley value for assignment games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 110-114.
    9. Pedro Calleja & Francesc Llerena, 2017. "Rationality, aggregate monotonicity and consistency in cooperative games: some (im)possibility results," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 197-220, January.
    10. Sylvain Béal & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal, 2015. "Axioms of invariance for TU-games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(4), pages 891-902, November.
    11. Li, Wenzhong & Xu, Genjiu & van den Brink, René, 2024. "Sign properties and axiomatizations of the weighted division values," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    12. Kamijo, Yoshio & Kongo, Takumi, 2012. "Whose deletion does not affect your payoff? The difference between the Shapley value, the egalitarian value, the solidarity value, and the Banzhaf value," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(3), pages 638-646.
    13. Yan-An Hwang, 2015. "A convergent transfer scheme based on the complement-associated game," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 255-263, October.
    14. Pérez-Castrillo, David & Sun, Chaoran, 2021. "Value-free reductions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 543-568.
    15. Koji Yokote, 2015. "Weak addition invariance and axiomatization of the weighted Shapley value," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(2), pages 275-293, May.
    16. Federico Valenciano & Annick Laruelle, 2003. "Potential, Value And Probability," Working Papers. Serie AD 2003-01, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    17. Takaaki Abe & Satoshi Nakada, 2019. "The weighted-egalitarian Shapley values," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(2), pages 197-213, February.
    18. Pedro Calleja & Francesc Llerena, 2019. "Path monotonicity, consistency and axiomatizations of some weighted solutions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(1), pages 287-310, March.
    19. Xun-Feng Hu, 2021. "New axiomatizations of the Owen value," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 93(3), pages 585-603, June.
    20. Casajus, André, 2014. "Potential, value, and random partitions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 164-166.
    21. Le Breton, Michel & Montero, Maria & Zaporozhets, Vera, 2012. "Voting power in the EU council of ministers and fair decision making in distributive politics," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 159-173.

    More about this item

    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:eee:matsoc:v:68:y:2014:i:c:p:1-4. 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/inca/505565 .

    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.