IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/40074.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Dynamic resource allocation in fuzzy coalitions : a game theoretic model

Author

Listed:
  • Neog, Rupok
  • Borkotokey, Surajit

Abstract

We introduce an efficient and dynamic resource allocation mechanism within the framework of a cooperative game with fuzzy coalitions. A fuzzy coalition in a resource allocation problem can be so defined that membership grades of the players in it, are proportional to the fractions of their total resources. We call any distribution of the resources possessed by the players, among a prescribed number of coalitions, a fuzzy coalition structure and every membership grade (equivalently fraction of the total resource), a resource investment. It is shown that this resource investment is influenced by satisfaction of the players in regards to better performance under a cooperative setup. Our model is based on the real life situations, where possibly one or more players compromise on their resource investments in order to help forming a coalition.

Suggested Citation

  • Neog, Rupok & Borkotokey, Surajit, 2011. "Dynamic resource allocation in fuzzy coalitions : a game theoretic model," MPRA Paper 40074, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:40074
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40074/1/MPRA_paper_40074.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tsurumi, Masayo & Tanino, Tetsuzo & Inuiguchi, Masahiro, 2001. "A Shapley function on a class of cooperative fuzzy games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(3), pages 596-618, March.
    2. Rodica Branzei & Dinko Dimitrov & Stef Tijs, 2008. "Models in Cooperative Game Theory," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-3-540-77954-4, October.
    3. Li, Shujin & Zhang, Qiang, 2009. "A simplified expression of the Shapley function for fuzzy game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(1), pages 234-245, July.
    4. Ronald R. Yager, 2007. "Multi-Agent Negotiation Using Linguistically Expressed Mediation Rules," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 1-23, January.
    5. Surajit Borkotokey & Rupok Neog, 2012. "Allocating Profit Among Rational Players in a Fuzzy Coalition: A Game Theoretic Model," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 439-459, July.
    6. Ray, Debraj & Vohra, Rajiv, 1997. "Equilibrium Binding Agreements," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 30-78, March.
    7. Debraj Ray & Rajiv Vohra, 2001. "Coalitional Power and Public Goods," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(6), pages 1355-1384, December.
    8. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    9. Yaron Azrieli & Ehud Lehrer, 2007. "On some families of cooperative fuzzy games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 36(1), pages 1-15, September.
    10. Arnold, Tone & Schwalbe, Ulrich, 2002. "Dynamic coalition formation and the core," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 363-380, November.
    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. Yu-Hsien Liao, 2017. "Fuzzy games: a complement-consistent solution, axiomatizations and dynamic approaches," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 257-268, September.
    2. Fanyong Meng & Xiaohong Chen, 2016. "Cooperative Fuzzy Games with Convex Combination Form," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 33(01), pages 1-25, February.

    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. Surajit Borkotokey & Rupok Neog, 2012. "Allocating Profit Among Rational Players in a Fuzzy Coalition: A Game Theoretic Model," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 439-459, July.
    2. Keyzer, Michiel & van Wesenbeeck, Cornelia, 2011. "Optimal coalition formation and surplus distribution: Two sides of one coin," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 215(3), pages 604-615, December.
    3. Hsien-Chung Wu, 2019. "Cores and dominance cores of cooperative games endowed with fuzzy payoffs," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 219-257, June.
    4. Stefan Ambec & Yann Kervinio, 2016. "Cooperative decision-making for the provision of a locally undesirable facility," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 119-155, January.
    5. Santiago Sánchez-Pagés, 2007. "Endogenous coalition formation in contests," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 11(2), pages 139-163, September.
    6. Thoron, Sylvie & Sol, Emmanuel & Willinger, Marc, 2009. "Do binding agreements solve the social dilemma?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(11-12), pages 1271-1282, December.
    7. Aymeric Lardon, 2019. "On the coalitional stability of monopoly power in differentiated Bertrand and Cournot oligopolies," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 87(4), pages 421-449, November.
    8. Nikhil Garg & Ashish Goel & Benjamin Plaut, 2021. "Markets for public decision-making," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(4), pages 755-801, May.
    9. Arnold, Tone & Wooders, Myrna, 2002. "Dynamic Club Formation with Coordination," Economic Research Papers 269414, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    10. Omer Biran, 2013. "Strategic collusion in auctions with externalities," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(1), pages 117-136, July.
    11. Liu, Jiuqiang & Liu, Xiaodong, 2013. "A necessary and sufficient condition for an NTU fuzzy game to have a non-empty fuzzy core," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 150-156.
    12. Françoise Forges & Roberto Serrano, 2013. "Cooperative Games With Incomplete Information: Some Open Problems," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 1-17.
    13. Sareh Vosooghi & Maria Arvaniti & Frederick Van Der Ploeg, 2022. "Self-enforcing climate coalitions for farsighted countries: integrated analysis of heterogeneous countries," Economics Series Working Papers 971, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    14. Michael Finus & Bianca Rundshagen, 2009. "Membership rules and stability of coalition structures in positive externality games," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(3), pages 389-406, March.
    15. Stefano Moretti & Fioravante Patrone, 2008. "Transversality of the Shapley value," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 16(1), pages 1-41, July.
    16. Dominik Karos, 2015. "Stable partitions for games with non-transferable utilities and externalities," Economics Series Working Papers 741, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    17. Fanyong Meng & Qiang Zhang & Xiaohong Chen, 2017. "Fuzzy Multichoice Games with Fuzzy Characteristic Functions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 565-595, May.
    18. Rozen, Kareen, 2008. "Conflict Leads to Cooperation in Nash Bargaining," Working Papers 39, Yale University, Department of Economics.
    19. Olaizola Ortega, María Norma & Kuipers, Jerome, 2004. "Internal Organization of Firms and Cartel Formation," IKERLANAK 2004-15, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.
    20. van den Brink, René & González-Arangüena, Enrique & Manuel, Conrado & del Pozo, Mónica, 2014. "Order monotonic solutions for generalized characteristic functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(3), pages 786-796.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    fuzzy coalitions; rational player; exact resource allocation; cooperative game;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • C02 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Mathematical Economics
    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games

    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:pra:mprapa:40074. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.