IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v31y2022i2d10.1007_s10726-021-09769-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reformulation of Public Help Index θ Using Null Player Free Winning Coalitions

Author

Listed:
  • Izabella Stach

    (AGH University of Science and Technology)

Abstract

This paper proposes a new representation for the Public Help Index θ (briefly, PHI θ). Based on winning coalitions, the PHI θ index was introduced by Bertini et al. in (2008). The goal of this article is to reformulate the PHI θ index using null player free winning coalitions. The set of these coalitions unequivocally defines a simple game. Expressing the PHI θ index by the winning coalitions that do not contain null players allows us in a transparent way to show the parts of the power assigned to null and non-null players in a simple game. Moreover, this new representation may imply a reduction of computational cost (in the sense of space complexity) in algorithms to compute the PHI θ index if at least one of the players is a null player. We also discuss some relationships among the Holler index, the PHI θ index, and the gnp index (based on null player free winning coalitions) proposed by Álvarez-Mozos et al. in (2015).

Suggested Citation

  • Izabella Stach, 2022. "Reformulation of Public Help Index θ Using Null Player Free Winning Coalitions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 317-334, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:31:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s10726-021-09769-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-021-09769-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-021-09769-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-021-09769-4?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. Cesarino Bertini & Gianfranco Gambarelli & Izabella Stach, 2008. "A Public Help Index," Springer Books, in: Matthew Braham & Frank Steffen (ed.), Power, Freedom, and Voting, chapter 5, pages 83-98, Springer.
    2. Josep Freixas, 2020. "The Banzhaf Value for Cooperative and Simple Multichoice Games," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 61-74, February.
    3. Josep Freixas & Montserrat Pons, 2017. "Using the Multilinear Extension to Study Some Probabilistic Power Indices," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 437-452, May.
    4. Alexander Mayer, 2018. "Luxembourg in the Early Days of the EEC: Null Player or Not?," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-12, May.
    5. Stefan Napel, 1999. "The Holler-Packel Axiomatization of the Public Good Index Completed," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 15, pages 513-520.
    6. Freixas, Josep & Kurz, Sascha, 2014. "On minimum integer representations of weighted games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 9-22.
    7. Federico Valenciano & Annick Laruelle & Ricardo Martínez, 2004. "Success Versus Decisiveness: Conceptual Discussion And Case Study," Working Papers. Serie AD 2004-30, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    8. Dan S. Felsenthal & Moshé Machover, 1998. "The Measurement of Voting Power," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1489.
    9. Pradeep Dubey & Lloyd S. Shapley, 1979. "Mathematical Properties of the Banzhaf Power Index," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 99-131, May.
    10. Cesarino Bertini & Josep Freixas & Gianfranco Gambarelli & Izabella Stach, 2013. "Comparing Power Indices," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 1-19.
    11. Freixas, Josep, 2012. "Probabilistic power indices for voting rules with abstention," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 89-99.
    12. Shapley, L. S. & Shubik, Martin, 1954. "A Method for Evaluating the Distribution of Power in a Committee System," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 787-792, September.
    13. Josep Freixas & Montserrat Pons, 2021. "An Appropriate Way to Extend the Banzhaf Index for Multiple Levels of Approval," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 447-462, April.
    14. repec:cup:cbooks:9781107691322 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Thomas König & Thomas Bräuninger, 1998. "The Inclusiveness of European Decision Rules," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 10(1), pages 125-142, January.
    16. Nowak, Andrzej S & Radzik, Tadeusz, 1994. "A Solidarity Value for n-Person Transferable Utility Games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 23(1), pages 43-48.
    17. Rae, Douglas W., 1969. "Decision-Rules and Individual Values in Constitutional Choice," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(1), pages 40-56, March.
    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. Le Breton, Michel & Lepelley, Dominique & Macé, Antonin & Merlin, Vincent, 2017. "Le mécanisme optimal de vote au sein du conseil des représentants d’un système fédéral," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 93(1-2), pages 203-248, Mars-Juin.
    2. Annick Laruelle & Ricardo Martınez & Federico Valenciano, 2006. "Success Versus Decisiveness," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 185-205, April.
    3. Michel Breton & Karine Straeten, 2015. "Influence versus utility in the evaluation of voting rules: a new look at the Penrose formula," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 103-122, October.
    4. Bertrand Mbama Engoulou & Pierre Wambo & Lawrence Diffo Lambo, 2023. "Banzhaf–Coleman–Dubey–Shapley sensitivity index for simple multichoice voting games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 328(2), pages 1349-1364, September.
    5. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2007. "Influence Indices," Post-Print halshs-00142479, HAL.
    6. René Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Frank Steffen, 2013. "Measuring power and satisfaction in societies with opinion leaders: an axiomatization," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(3), pages 671-683, September.
    7. Annick Laruelle & Federico Valenciano, 2005. "A critical reappraisal of some voting power paradoxes," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 125(1), pages 17-41, July.
    8. Josep Freixas & Montserrat Pons, 2017. "Using the Multilinear Extension to Study Some Probabilistic Power Indices," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 437-452, May.
    9. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2009. "Measuring influence in command games," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(2), pages 177-209, August.
    10. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2010. "A model of influence in a social network," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 69-96, July.
    11. Somdeb Lahiri, 2021. "Pattanaik's axioms and the existence of winners preferred with probability at least half," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 31(2), pages 109-122.
    12. Kurz, Sascha & Maaser, Nicola & Napel, Stefan, 2018. "Fair representation and a linear Shapley rule," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 152-161.
    13. Josep Freixas & Montserrat Pons, 2022. "A critical analysis on the notion of power," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 318(2), pages 911-933, November.
    14. René van den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Frank Steffen, 2009. "Measuring Power and Satisfaction in Societies with Opinion Leaders: Dictator and Opinion Leader Properties," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-052/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    15. Artyom Jelnov & Pavel Jelnov, 2019. "Success, Survival and Probabilistic Voting: The Case of a ruling Party," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 209-226, December.
    16. René van den Brink & Frank Steffen, 2012. "On the Measurement of Success and Satisfaction," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 12-030/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    17. Giulia Bernardi, 2018. "A New Axiomatization of the Banzhaf Index for Games with Abstention," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 165-177, February.
    18. Bertrand Mbama Engoulou & Pierre Wambo & Lawrence Diffo Lambo, 2023. "A Characterization of the Totally Critical Raw Banzhaf Power Index on Dichotomous Voting Games with Several Levels of Approval in Input," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 871-888, August.
    19. Josep Freixas & Montserrat Pons, 2015. "Success and decisiveness on proper symmetric games," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(4), pages 779-794, December.
    20. Freixas, Josep & Pons, Montserrat, 2008. "Circumstantial power: Optimal persuadable voters," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(3), pages 1114-1126, May.

    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:spr:grdene:v:31:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s10726-021-09769-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.