IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2202.05229.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How rare are the properties of binary relations?

Author

Listed:
  • Ram Sewak Dubey
  • Giorgio Laguzzi

Abstract

Knoblauch (2014) and Knoblauch (2015) investigate the relative size of the collection of binary relations with desirable features as compared to the set of all binary relations using symmetric difference metric (Cantor) topology and Hausdorff metric topology. We consider Ellentuck and doughnut topologies to further this line of investigation. We report the differences among the size of the useful binary relations in Cantor, Ellentuck and doughnut topologies. It turns out that the doughnut topology admits binary relations with more general properties in contrast to the other two. We further prove that among the induced Cantor and Ellentuck topologies, the latter captures the relative size of partial orders among the collection of all quasi-orders. Finally we show that the class of ethical binary relations is small in Ellentuck (and therefore in Cantor) topology but is not small in doughnut topology. In essence, the Ellentuck topology fares better compared to Cantor topology in capturing the relative size of collections of binary relations.

Suggested Citation

  • Ram Sewak Dubey & Giorgio Laguzzi, 2022. "How rare are the properties of binary relations?," Papers 2202.05229, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2202.05229
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2202.05229
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/10273 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Sen, Amartya, 1973. "On Economic Inequality," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198281931.
    3. Balasko, Yves & Cres, Herve, 1997. "The Probability of Condorcet Cycles and Super Majority Rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 237-270, August.
    4. Claude D'Aspremont & Louis Gevers, 1977. "Equity and the Informational Basis of Collective Choice," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 44(2), pages 199-209.
    5. Chichilnisky, Graciela, 1980. "Social choice and the topology of spaces of preferences," MPRA Paper 8006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Tovey, Craig A., 1997. "Probabilities of Preferences and Cycles with Super Majority Rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 271-279, August.
    7. Vicki Knoblauch, 2014. "Preference, topology and measure," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(2), pages 507-514, August.
    8. James Boudreau & Justin Ehrlich & Mian Farrukh Raza & Shane Sanders, 2018. "The likelihood of social choice violations in rank sum scoring: algorithms and evidence from NCAA cross country running," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 174(3), pages 219-238, 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. Knoblauch, Vicki, 2023. "Lexicographic preference representation: Intrinsic length of linear orders on infinite sets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).

    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. Vicki Knoblauch, 2015. "Two preference metrics provide settings for the study of properties of binary relations," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 615-625, December.
    2. Vincenzo Atella & Jay Coggins & Federico Perali, 2005. "Aversion to inequality in Italy and its determinants," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 2(2), pages 117-144, January.
    3. Kotaro Suzumura, 2002. "Introduction to social choice and welfare," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 442, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    4. McCarthy, David & Mikkola, Kalle & Thomas, Teruji, 2016. "Utilitarianism with and without expected utility," MPRA Paper 72578, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Nicolas Gravel & Patrick Moyes, 2006. "Ethically Robust Comparisons of Distributions of Two Individual Attributes," IDEP Working Papers 0605, Institut d'economie publique (IDEP), Marseille, France, revised Aug 2006.
    6. Mostapha Diss & Patrizia Pérez-Asurmendi, 2016. "Probabilities of Consistent Election Outcomes with Majorities Based on Difference in Support," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 967-994, September.
    7. Ram Sewak Dubey & Tapan Mitra, 2015. "On social welfare functions on infinite utility streams satisfying Hammond Equity and Weak Pareto axioms: a complete characterization," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 169-180, October.
    8. Gustavo Bergantiños & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2023. "Decentralized revenue sharing from broadcasting sports," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 194(1), pages 27-44, January.
    9. Bleichrodt, Han, 1997. "Health utility indices and equity considerations," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 65-91, February.
    10. Walter Bossert & Kohei Kamaga, 2020. "An axiomatization of the mixed utilitarian–maximin social welfare orderings," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 69(2), pages 451-473, March.
    11. Nicolas Gravel & Abhiroop Mukhopadhyay, 2010. "Is India better off today than 15 years ago? A robust multidimensional answer," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 8(2), pages 173-195, June.
    12. d'Aspremont, Claude & Gevers, Louis, 2002. "Social welfare functionals and interpersonal comparability," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 459-541, Elsevier.
    13. İbrahim Erdem SEÇİLMİŞ, 2014. "Seniority: A Blessing or A Curse? The Effect of Economics Training on the Perception of Distributive Justice," Sosyoekonomi Journal, Sosyoekonomi Society, issue 22(22).
    14. Claude d' Aspremont, 1994. "Welfarism and interpersonal comparisons," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 18(1), pages 3-17, January.
    15. repec:hal:journl:dumas-00906152 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Mostapha Diss & Patrizia Pérez-Asurmendi, 2016. "Consistent collective decisions under majorities based on difference of votes," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(3), pages 473-494, March.
    17. Mongin, Philippe, 2019. "Interview of Peter J. Hammond," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 50, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.
    18. Bart Capéau, 2013. "Size and distribution trade-offs for the leximin ordering," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 11(2), pages 237-248, June.
    19. Mostapha Diss & Patrizia Pérez-Asurmendi, 2015. "Consistent collective decisions under majorities based on difference of votes," Working Papers halshs-01241996, HAL.
    20. Dubey, Ram Sewak & Laguzzi, Giorgio, 2021. "Equitable preference relations on infinite utility streams," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    21. Kamaga, Kohei, 2018. "When do utilitarianism and egalitarianism agree on evaluation? An intersection approach," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 41-48.

    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:arx:papers:2202.05229. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.