IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2204.05105.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Describing Sen's Transitivity Condition in Inequalities and Equations

Author

Listed:
  • Fujun Hou

Abstract

In social choice theory, Sen's value restriction condition is a sufficiency condition restricted to individuals' ordinal preferences so as to obtain a transitive social preference under the majority decision rule. In this article, Sen's transitivity condition is described by use of inequality and equation. First, for a triple of alternatives, an individual's preference is represented by a preference map, whose entries are sets containing the ranking position or positions derived from the individual's preference over that triple of those alternatives. Second, by using the union operation of sets and the cardinality concept, Sen's transitivity condition is described by inequalities. Finally, by using the membership function of sets, Sen's transitivity condition is further described by equations.

Suggested Citation

  • Fujun Hou, 2022. "Describing Sen's Transitivity Condition in Inequalities and Equations," Papers 2204.05105, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2204.05105
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.05105
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hou, Fujun & Triantaphyllou, Evangelos, 2019. "An iterative approach for achieving consensus when ranking a finite set of alternatives by a group of experts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 570-579.
    2. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1950. "A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(4), pages 328-328.
    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. Fujun Hou, 2022. "Reformulating the Value Restriction and the Not-Strict Value Restriction in Terms of Possibility Preference Map," Papers 2205.07400, arXiv.org.
    2. Csaba, László, 2014. "Átmenettan és közgazdaságtan. Módszertani tanulságok egy részterület műveléséből [Transitology" and economics. Methodological lessons to be drawn from work in a partial territory]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 53-67.
    3. Crispin H. V. Cooper, 2020. "Quantitative Models of Well-Being to Inform Policy: Problems and Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-13, April.
    4. Kotaro Suzumura, 2020. "Reflections on Arrow’s research program of social choice theory," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(2), pages 219-235, March.
    5. Leo Katz & Alvaro Sandroni, 2020. "Limits on power and rationality," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(2), pages 507-521, March.
    6. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chris, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    7. María Gabriela Palacio, 2016. "Institutionalizing segregation: Conditional cash transfers and employment choices," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2016-91, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. Donaldson, Jason & Piacentino, Giorgia & Malenko, Nadya, 2017. "Deadlock on the Board," CEPR Discussion Papers 12503, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Tetsuya, Saito, 2007. "Military Expenditures of Dictatorial Regimes: A Strategic Theory," MPRA Paper 6155, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Freixas, Josep & Parker, Cameron, 2015. "Manipulation in games with multiple levels of output," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 144-151.
    11. Bhattacharya, Mihir & Gravel, Nicolas, 2021. "Is the preference of the majority representative ?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 87-94.
    12. repec:eee:labchp:v:2:y:1986:i:c:p:1039-1089 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. António Osório, 2020. "Performance Evaluation: Subjectivity, Bias and Judgment Style in Sport," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 655-678, August.
    14. Nolan, Matt, 2018. "Horizontal and Vertical Equity in the New Zealand Tax-Transfer System: 1988-2013," Working Paper Series 7657, Victoria University of Wellington, Chair in Public Finance.
    15. Nicola Acocella-super-, 2017. "The Rise And Decline Of Economic Policy As An Autonomous Discipline: A Critical Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 661-677, July.
    16. Darcy W. E. Allen & Chris Berg & Sinclair Davidson & Jason Potts, 2022. "On Coase and COVID-19," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 107-125, August.
    17. Antoinette Baujard, 2016. "Welfare economics," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 42, pages 611-624, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Marc Fleurbaey & Koichi Tadenuma, 2007. "Do Irrelevant Commodities Matter?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(4), pages 1143-1174, July.
    19. Stensholt, Eivind, 2019. "MMP-elections and the assembly size," Discussion Papers 2019/15, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    20. Gong, Zaiwu & Guo, Weiwei & Słowiński, Roman, 2021. "Transaction and interaction behavior-based consensus model and its application to optimal carbon emission reduction," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    21. Elchanan Mossel & Omer Tamuz, 2012. "Complete characterization of functions satisfying the conditions of Arrow’s theorem," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(1), pages 127-140, June.

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:2204.05105. 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.