IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2212.12251.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The connection between Arrow theorem and Sperner lemma

Author

Listed:
  • Nikita Miku

Abstract

It is well known that Sperner lemma is equivalent to Brouwer fixed-point theorem. Tanaka [12] proved that Brouwer theorem is equivalent to Arrow theorem, hence Arrow theorem is equivalent to Sperner lemma. In this paper we will prove this result directly. Moreover, we describe a number of other statements equivalent to Arrow theorem.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikita Miku, 2022. "The connection between Arrow theorem and Sperner lemma," Papers 2212.12251, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2212.12251
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.12251
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Graciela Chichilnisky, 1982. "Social Aggregation Rules and Continuity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 97(2), pages 337-352.
    2. Chichilnisky, Graciela, 1979. "On fixed point theorems and social choice paradoxes," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 347-351.
    3. Chichilnisky, Graciela, 1980. "Social choice and the topology of spaces of preferences," MPRA Paper 8006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Sen, Amartya, 1995. "Rationality and Social Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 1-24, March.
    5. Luc Lauwers, 2009. "The topological approach to the aggregation of preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(3), pages 449-476, September.
    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. Lauwers, Luc, 2000. "Topological social choice," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 1-39, July.
    2. Graciela Chichilnisky, 1996. "A robust theory of resource allocation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, January.
    3. Chichilnisky, Graciela, 1983. "Social choice and game theory: recent results with a topological approach," MPRA Paper 8059, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Ju, Biung-Ghi, 2004. "Continuous selections from the Pareto correspondence and non-manipulability in exchange economies," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 573-592, August.
    5. Askoura, Youcef & Billot, Antoine, 2021. "Social decision for a measure society," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    6. Wu-Hsiung Huang, 2014. "Singularity and Arrow’s paradox," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(3), pages 671-706, March.
    7. Luc Lauwers, 2002. "A note on Chichilnisky's social choice paradox," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 261-266, May.
    8. Salvador Barberà & Dolors Berga & Bernardo Moreno, 2020. "Arrow on domain conditions: a fruitful road to travel," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(2), pages 237-258, March.
    9. I.D.A. Macintyre, 1998. "Two-Person and majority continuous aggregation in 2-good space in Social Choice: a note," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 199-209, April.
    10. Takuma Okura, 2024. "A topological proof of Terao's generalized Arrow's Impossibility Theorem," Papers 2408.14263, arXiv.org.
    11. Chichilnisky, Graciela & Heal, Geoffrey, 1983. "Necessary and sufficient conditions for a resolution of the social choice paradox," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 68-87, October.
    12. Guillaume Chèze, 2017. "Topological aggregation, the twin paradox and the No Show paradox," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(4), pages 707-715, April.
    13. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2004:i:6:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Luc Lauwers, 2009. "The topological approach to the aggregation of preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(3), pages 449-476, September.
    15. Maurice Salles, 2014. "‘Social choice and welfare’ at 30: its role in the development of social choice theory and welfare economics," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(1), pages 1-16, January.
    16. Andrea Attar & Thomas Mariotti & François Salanié, 2019. "On a class of smooth preferences," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 7(1), pages 37-57, May.
    17. Wu-Hsiung Huang, 2009. "Is a continuous rational social aggregation impossible on continuum spaces?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(4), pages 635-686, May.
    18. Chichilnisky, Graciela, 1985. "Von Neuman- Morgenstern utilities and cardinal preferences," MPRA Paper 8090, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Tanaka, Yasuhito, 2007. "A topological approach to Wilson's impossibility theorem," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 184-191, February.
    20. Campbell, Donald E. & Kelly, Jerry S., 1996. "Continuous-valued social choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 195-211.
    21. Crespo, Juan A. & Sanchez-Gabites, J.J, 2016. "Solving the Social Choice problem under equality constraints," MPRA Paper 72757, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:2212.12251. 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.