IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2308.03507.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How to choose a Compatible Committee?

Author

Listed:
  • Ritu Dutta
  • Rajnish Kumnar
  • Surajit Borkotokey

Abstract

Electing a committee of size k from m alternatives (k

Suggested Citation

  • Ritu Dutta & Rajnish Kumnar & Surajit Borkotokey, 2023. "How to choose a Compatible Committee?," Papers 2308.03507, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2308.03507
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2308.03507
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Piotr Faliszewski & Piotr Skowron & Arkadii Slinko & Nimrod Talmon, 2018. "Multiwinner analogues of the plurality rule: axiomatic and algorithmic perspectives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(3), pages 513-550, October.
    2. Pierre Dehez & Victor Ginsburgh, 2020. "Approval voting and Shapley ranking," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 184(3), pages 415-428, September.
    3. Thomas C. Ratliff, 2003. "Some startling inconsistencies when electing committees," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 21(3), pages 433-454, December.
    4. Kamwa, Eric & Merlin, Vincent, 2015. "Scoring rules over subsets of alternatives: Consistency and paradoxes," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 130-138.
    5. Lackner, Martin & Skowron, Piotr, 2021. "Consistent approval-based multi-winner rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    6. Roberto Lucchetti & Stefano Moretti & Fioravante Patrone, 2015. "Ranking sets of interacting objects via semivalues," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 23(2), pages 567-590, July.
    7. Giulia Bernardi & Roberto Lucchetti & Stefano Moretti, 2019. "Ranking objects from a preference relation over their subsets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(4), pages 589-606, April.
    8. Einy, Ezra & Haimanko, Ori, 2011. "Characterization of the Shapley–Shubik power index without the efficiency axiom," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 615-621.
    9. Thomas Ratliff & Donald Saari, 2014. "Complexities of electing diverse committees," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(1), pages 55-71, June.
    10. Darmann, Andreas, 2013. "How hard is it to tell which is a Condorcet committee?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 282-292.
    11. Casajus, André, 2014. "The Shapley value without efficiency and additivity," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-4.
    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. Ritu Dutta & Rajnish Kumar & Surajit Borkotokey, 2024. "How to choose a compatible committee?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 201(1), pages 181-198, October.
    2. Fatma Aslan & Hayrullah Dindar & Jean Lainé, 2022. "When are committees of Condorcet winners Condorcet winning committees?," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(3), pages 417-446, September.
    3. Mostapha Diss & Eric Kamwa & Abdelmonaim Tlidi, 2019. "On some k-scoring rules for committee elections: agreement and Condorcet Principle," Working Papers hal-02147735, HAL.
    4. Egor Ianovski, 2022. "Electing a committee with dominance constraints," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 318(2), pages 985-1000, November.
    5. Eric Kamwa & Vincent Merlin, 2018. "Coincidence of Condorcet committees," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(1), pages 171-189, January.
    6. Mostapha Diss & Eric Kamwa & Abdelmonaim Tlidi, 2020. "On Some k -scoring Rules for Committee Elections: Agreement and Condorcet Principle," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 130(5), pages 699-725.
    7. Edith Elkind & Piotr Faliszewski & Piotr Skowron & Arkadii Slinko, 2017. "Properties of multiwinner voting rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(3), pages 599-632, March.
    8. Mostapha Diss & Clinton Gubong Gassi & Issofa Moyouwou, 2023. "Combining diversity and excellence in multi winner elections," Working Papers 2023-05, CRESE.
    9. Felix Fritz & Stefano Moretti & Jochen Staudacher, 2023. "Social Ranking Problems at the Interplay between Social Choice Theory and Coalitional Games," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-22, December.
    10. Ritu Dutta & Souvik Roy & Surajit Borkotokey, 2023. "The Generalized Shapley Value of Cooperative Games as a Social Preference Function," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 277-300, April.
    11. Mostapha Diss & Eric Kamwa & Abdelmonaim Tlidi, 2018. "The Chamberlin-Courant Rule and the k-Scoring Rules: Agreement and Condorcet Committee Consistency," Working Papers halshs-01817943, HAL.
    12. Shan, Erfang & Cui, Zeguang & Lyu, Wenrong, 2023. "Gain–loss and new axiomatizations of the Shapley value," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    13. Kamwa, Eric, 2017. "On stable rules for selecting committees," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 36-44.
    14. Suzuki, Takahiro & Horita, Masahide, 2024. "Which set of agents plays a key role? An impossibility in transforming binary relations," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 12-19.
    15. Mostapha Diss & Ahmed Doghmi, 2016. "Multi-winner scoring election methods: Condorcet consistency and paradoxes," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 97-116, October.
    16. Sylvain Béal & Marc Deschamps & Mostapha Diss & Rodrigue Tido Takeng, 2024. "Cooperative games with diversity constraints," Working Papers hal-04447373, HAL.
    17. David McCune & Erin Martin & Grant Latina & Kaitlyn Simms, 2023. "A Comparison of Sequential Ranked-Choice Voting and Single Transferable Vote," Papers 2306.17341, arXiv.org.
    18. Thomas Ratliff & Donald Saari, 2014. "Complexities of electing diverse committees," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(1), pages 55-71, June.
    19. Diss, Mostapha & Mahajne, Muhammad, 2020. "Social acceptability of Condorcet committees," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 14-27.
    20. Ricardo Mart'inez & Joaqu'in S'anchez-Soriano, 2023. "Order preservation with dummies in the musseum pass problem," Papers 2307.00622, arXiv.org.

    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:2308.03507. 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.