IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2208.10189.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gately Values of Cooperative Games

Author

Listed:
  • Robert P. Gilles
  • Lina Mallozzi

Abstract

We investigate Gately's solution concept for cooperative games with transferable utilities. Gately's conception introduced a bargaining solution that minimises the maximal quantified ``propensity to disrupt'' the negotiation process of the players over the allocation of the generated collective payoffs. Gately's solution concept is well-defined for a broad class of games. We also consider a generalisation based on a parameter-based quantification of the propensity to disrupt. Furthermore, we investigate the relationship of these generalised Gately values with the Core and the Nucleolus and show that Gately's solution is in the Core for all regular 3-player games. We identify exact conditions under which generally these Gately values are Core imputations for arbitrary regular cooperative games. Finally, we investigate the relationship of the Gately value with the Shapley value.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert P. Gilles & Lina Mallozzi, 2022. "Gately Values of Cooperative Games," Papers 2208.10189, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2208.10189
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2208.10189
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gately, Dermot, 1974. "Sharing the Gains from Regional Cooperation: A Game Theoretic Application to Planning Investment in Electric Power," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 15(1), pages 195-208, February.
    2. Lehrer, E, 1988. "An Axiomatization of the Banzhaf Value," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 17(2), pages 89-99.
    3. Rodica Branzei & Dinko Dimitrov & Stef Tijs, 2008. "Models in Cooperative Game Theory," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-3-540-77954-4, December.
    4. Jochen Staudacher & Johannes Anwander, 2019. "Conditions for the uniqueness of the Gately point for cooperative games," Papers 1901.01485, arXiv.org.
    5. René Brink & Yukihiko Funaki, 2009. "Axiomatizations of a Class of Equal Surplus Sharing Solutions for TU-Games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 67(3), pages 303-340, September.
    6. 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).
    7. René van den Brink & Peter Borm, 2002. "Digraph Competitions and Cooperative Games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 327-342, December.
    8. Peter Borm & René van den Brink & Marco Slikker, 2002. "An Iterative Procedure for Evaluating Digraph Competitions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 61-75, January.
    9. Maschler, Michael, 1992. "The bargaining set, kernel, and nucleolus," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 591-667, Elsevier.
    10. Robert P. Gilles, 2010. "The Cooperative Game Theory of Networks and Hierarchies," Theory and Decision Library C, Springer, number 978-3-642-05282-8, September.
    11. René Brink & Peter Borm & Ruud Hendrickx & Guillermo Owen, 2008. "Characterizations of the β- and the Degree Network Power Measure," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 64(4), pages 519-536, 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. Robert P. Gilles & Lina Mallozzi, 2023. "Game Theoretic Foundations of the Gately Power Measure for Directed Networks," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-19, September.

    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. Gilles, Robert P. & Mallozzi, Lina, 2022. "Generalised Gately Values of Cooperative Games," QBS Working Paper Series 2022/06, Queen's University Belfast, Queen's Business School.
    2. Robert P. Gilles & Lina Mallozzi, 2023. "Game Theoretic Foundations of the Gately Power Measure for Directed Networks," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-19, September.
    3. Yuan Ju & Peter Borm & Pieter Ruys, 2007. "The consensus value: a new solution concept for cooperative games," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 28(4), pages 685-703, June.
    4. René Brink, 2017. "Games with a permission structure - A survey on generalizations and applications," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 25(1), pages 1-33, April.
    5. Aleksei Y. Kondratev & Vladimir V. Mazalov, 2020. "Tournament solutions based on cooperative game theory," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(1), pages 119-145, March.
    6. McQuillin, Ben & Sugden, Robert, 2018. "Balanced externalities and the Shapley value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 81-92.
    7. Peter Knudsen & Lars Østerdal, 2012. "Merging and splitting in cooperative games: some (im)possibility results," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(4), pages 763-774, November.
    8. Lukáš Adam & Tomáš Kroupa, 2017. "The intermediate set and limiting superdifferential for coalitional games: between the core and the Weber set," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(4), pages 891-918, November.
    9. Sylvain Béal & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal, 2015. "Discounted Tree Solutions," Working Papers hal-01377923, HAL.
    10. Montero, M.P., 2002. "Two-Stage Bargaining with Reversible Coalitions : The Case of Apex Games," Other publications TiSEM 7dba0283-bc13-4f2c-8f5e-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Panfei Sun & Dongshuang Hou & Hao Sun & Hui Zhang, 2017. "Process and optimization implementation of the $$\alpha $$ α -ENSC value," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 86(2), pages 293-308, October.
    12. J Arin & V Feltkamp & M Montero, 2012. "Coalitional Games with Veto Players: Myopic and Rational Behavior," Discussion Papers 2012-11, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    13. Brânzei, R. & Fragnelli, V. & Meca, A. & Tijs, S.H., 2006. "Two Classes of Cooperative Games Related to One-Object Auction Situations," Discussion Paper 2006-25, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    14. Borm, Peter & van den Brink, Rene & Levinsky, Rene & Slikker, Marco, 2004. "On two new social choice correspondences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 51-68, January.
    15. Ruiz, Luis M. & Valenciano, Federico & Zarzuelo, Jose M., 1998. "The Family of Least Square Values for Transferable Utility Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 109-130, July.
    16. J. Arin & V. Feltkamp & M. Montero, 2015. "A bargaining procedure leading to the serial rule in games with veto players," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 229(1), pages 41-66, June.
    17. Sakawa, Masatoshi & Nishizaki, Ichiro & Uemura, Yoshio, 2001. "Fuzzy programming and profit and cost allocation for a production and transportation problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(1), pages 1-15, May.
    18. 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.
    19. Wenna Wang & Hao Sun & Rene (J.R.) van den Brink & Genjiu Xu, 2018. "The family of ideal values for cooperative games," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 18-002/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    20. Wenna Wang & Hao Sun & René Brink & Genjiu Xu, 2019. "The Family of Ideal Values for Cooperative Games," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 180(3), pages 1065-1086, March.

    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:2208.10189. 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.