IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mtl/montec/03-2016.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ranking by Rating

Author

Listed:
  • Yves SPRUMONT

Abstract

Each item in a given collection is characterized by a set of possible performances. A (ranking) method is a function that assigns an ordering of the items to every performance profile. Ranking by Rating consists in evaluating each item's performance by using an exogenous rating function, and ranking items according to their performance ratings. Any such method is separable: the ordering of two items does not depend on the performances of the remaining items. We prove that every separable method must be of the ranking-by-rating type if (i) the set of possible performances is the same for all items and the method is anonymous, or (ii) the set of performances of each item is ordered and the method is monotonic. When performances are m-dimensional vectors, a separable, continuous, anonymous, monotonic, and invariant method must rank items according to a weighted geometric mean of their performances along the m dimensions.

Suggested Citation

  • Yves SPRUMONT, 2016. "Ranking by Rating," Cahiers de recherche 03-2016, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    • Handle: RePEc:mtl:montec:03-2016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cireqmontreal.com/wp-content/uploads/cahiers/03-2016-cah.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. ,, 2014. "A ranking method based on handicaps," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(3), September.
    2. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-01109087 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. W. M. Gorman, 1968. "The Structure of Utility Functions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 35(4), pages 367-390.
    4. Giora Slutzki & Oscar Volij, 2006. "Scoring of web pages and tournaments—axiomatizations," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 26(1), pages 75-92, January.
    5. Liebowitz, S J & Palmer, J P, 1984. "Assessing the Relative Impacts of Economic Journals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 77-88, March.
    6. Osborne, Dale K, 1976. "Irrelevant Alternatives and Social Welfare," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(5), pages 1001-1015, September.
    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. Cho, Wonki Jo, 2022. "How to add apples and oranges: Aggregating performances of different nature," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 222-244.
    2. Kapustina Nadezhda (Капустина Н.В.) & Komaricheva Victoria (Комаричева В.А.) & Rustamova Irada (Рустамова И.Т.), 2021. "Knowledge Economics As An Innovative Factor For Economic Development And Growth [Экономика Знаний Как Инновационный Фактор Экономического Развития И Роста]," State and Municipal Management Scholar Notes, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 2, pages 117-120.
    3. Long, Yan & Sethuraman, Jay & Xue, Jingyi, 2021. "Equal-quantile rules in resource allocation with uncertain needs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    4. Macé, Antonin, 2018. "Voting with evaluations: Characterizations of evaluative voting and range voting," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 10-17.

    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. Demange, Gabrielle, 2017. "Mutual rankings," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 35-42.
    2. Cho, Wonki Jo, 2022. "How to add apples and oranges: Aggregating performances of different nature," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 222-244.
    3. Carmen Herrero & Antonio Villar, 2022. "Sports competitions and the Break-Even rule," Working Papers 22.13, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    4. Gabrielle Demange, 2012. "On the influence of a ranking system," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(2), pages 431-455, July.
    5. ,, 2014. "A ranking method based on handicaps," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(3), September.
    6. René van den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2017. "The degree measure as utility function over positions in networks," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 17035, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    7. Ham, John C. & Wright, Julian & Ye, Ziqiu, 2023. "Documenting and Explaining the Dramatic Rise of the New Society Journals in Economics," IZA Discussion Papers 16337, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Gabrielle Demange, 2011. "On the influence of rankings," PSE Working Papers halshs-00589657, HAL.
    9. Herrero, Carmen & Villar, Antonio, 2021. "Group decisions from individual rankings: The Borda–Condorcet rule," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 757-765.
    10. van den Brink, René & Rusinowska, Agnieszka, 2022. "The degree measure as utility function over positions in graphs and digraphs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(3), pages 1033-1044.
    11. Carmen Herrero & Antonio Villar, 2022. "Pairwise contests: wins, losses, and strength," Working Papers 22.11, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    12. Lutz Bornmann & Alexander Butz & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2018. "What are the top five journals in economics? A new meta-ranking," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(6), pages 659-675, February.
    13. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2016. "Ranking authors using fractional counting of citations: An axiomatic approach," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 183-199.
    14. Bergemann, Dirk & Ottaviani, Marco, 2021. "Information Markets and Nonmarkets," CEPR Discussion Papers 16459, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Itay Fainmesser & Chaim Fershtman & Neil Gandal, 2009. "A Consistent Weighted Ranking Scheme With an Application to NCAA College Football Rankings," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 10(6), pages 582-600, December.
    16. Kim‐Sau Chung & Meng‐Yu Liang & Melody Lo, 2022. "On the information contents of indirect citations," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(1), pages 156-173, February.
    17. Brink, René van den & Rusinowska, Agnieszka, 2021. "The degree ratio ranking method for directed graphs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(2), pages 563-575.
    18. Gonzalez-Diaz, J. & Hendrickx, R.L.P. & Lohmann, E.R.M.A., 2011. "Paired Comparisons Analysis : An Axiomatic Approach to Rankings in Tournaments," Discussion Paper 2011-116, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    19. Julio González-Díaz & Ruud Hendrickx & Edwin Lohmann, 2014. "Paired comparisons analysis: an axiomatic approach to ranking methods," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(1), pages 139-169, January.
    20. Gonzalez-Diaz, J. & Hendrickx, R.L.P. & Lohmann, E.R.M.A., 2011. "Paired Comparisons Analysis : An Axiomatic Approach to Rankings in Tournaments," Other publications TiSEM 2dbfd64d-2a1b-445c-86c6-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ranking methods; separability;

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D89 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Other

    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:mtl:montec:03-2016. 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: Sharon BREWER (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cdmtlca.html .

    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.