IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tiu/tiutis/03637fc0-696b-4b91-b292-d0e789c88185.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Iterative Procedure for Evaluating Digraph Competitions

Author

Listed:
  • Borm, P.E.M.

    (Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management)

  • van den Brink, J.R.

    (Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management)

  • Slikker, M.

    (Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management)

Abstract

A competition which is based on the results of (partial) pairwise comparisons can be modelled by means of a directed graph. Given initial weights on the nodes in such digraph competitions, we view the measurement of the importance (i.e., the cardinal ranking) of the nodes as an allocation problem where we redistribute the initial weights on the basis of insights from cooperative game theory. After describing the resulting procedure of redistributing the initial weights, an iterative process is described that repeats this procedure: at each step the allocation obtained in the previous step determines the new input weights. Existence and uniqueness of the limit is established for arbitrary digraphs. Applications to the evaluation of, e.g., sport competitions and paired comparison experiments are discussed. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Borm, P.E.M. & van den Brink, J.R. & Slikker, M., 2000. "An Iterative Procedure for Evaluating Digraph Competitions," Other publications TiSEM 03637fc0-696b-4b91-b292-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:tiu:tiutis:03637fc0-696b-4b91-b292-d0e789c88185
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repository.tilburguniversity.edu/bitstreams/1f98f16b-3571-43ee-9dcc-899d7d7d01ba/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. René van den Brink & Peter Borm, 2002. "Digraph Competitions and Cooperative Games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 327-342, December.
    2. Laffond G. & Laslier J. F. & Le Breton M., 1993. "The Bipartisan Set of a Tournament Game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 182-201, January.
    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. Förster, Manuel & Grabisch, Michel & Rusinowska, Agnieszka, 2013. "Anonymous social influence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 621-635.
    2. Robert P. Gilles & Lina Mallozzi, 2022. "Gately Values of Cooperative Games," Papers 2208.10189, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    3. Manuel Förster & Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2012. "Ordered Weighted Averaging in Social Networks," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 12056, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    4. Grabisch, Michel & Rusinowska, Agnieszka, 2011. "A model of influence with a continuum of actions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 576-587.
    5. 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.
    6. Herings, P.J.J. & van der Laan, G. & Talman, A.J.J., 2001. "Measuring the Power of Nodes in Digraphs," Discussion Paper 2001-72, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    7. Marco Slikker & Peter Borm & René Brink, 2012. "Internal slackening scoring methods," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 445-462, April.
    8. Encarnación Algaba & René Brink & Chris Dietz, 2017. "Power Measures and Solutions for Games Under Precedence Constraints," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 172(3), pages 1008-1022, March.
    9. 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.
    10. van den Brink, J.R. & Borm, P.E.M. & Hendrickx, R.L.P. & Owen, G., 2008. "Characterizations of the beta- and the degree network power measure," Other publications TiSEM 101ef139-cc05-4b30-bef5-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. René van den Brink & Peter Borm & Ruud Hendrickx & Guillermo Owen, 2005. "Characterizations of Network Power Measures," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 05-061/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. László Csató, 2015. "A graph interpretation of the least squares ranking method," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 51-69, January.
    13. Quant, M. & Borm, P.E.M. & Reijnierse, J.H. & Voorneveld, M., 2002. "Characterizations of Solutions in Digraph Competitions," Other publications TiSEM f8406395-a31f-47b0-ab62-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Encarnacion Algaba & René van den Brink & Chris Dietz, 2015. "Power Measures and Solutions for Games under Precedence Constraints," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 15-007/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    15. 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.
    16. Mitri Kitti, 2016. "Axioms for centrality scoring with principal eigenvectors," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(3), pages 639-653, March.
    17. Quant, M. & Borm, P.E.M. & Reijnierse, J.H. & Voorneveld, M., 2006. "On the Beta measure for digraph competitions," Other publications TiSEM 214590f7-5605-42d6-8353-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Mitri Kitti, 2012. "Axioms for Centrality Scoring with Principal Eigenvectors," Discussion Papers 79, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    19. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. Rafael Amer & José Giménez & Antonio Magaña, 2012. "Accessibility measures to nodes of directed graphs using solutions for generalized cooperative games," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 75(1), pages 105-134, February.
    3. 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.
    4. Amer, Rafael & Gimenez, Jose Miguel & Magana, Antonio, 2007. "Accessibility in oriented networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 180(2), pages 700-712, July.
    5. De Donder, Philippe & Le Breton, Michel & Truchon, Michel, 2000. "Choosing from a weighted tournament1," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 85-109, July.
    6. Xefteris, Dimitrios, 2017. "Multidimensional electoral competition between differentiated candidates," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 112-121.
    7. Banks, Jeffrey S. & Duggan, John & Le Breton, Michel, 2002. "Bounds for Mixed Strategy Equilibria and the Spatial Model of Elections," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 88-105, March.
    8. Gilbert Laffond & Jean-François Laslier & Michel Breton, 2000. "K–Player Additive Extension of Two-Player games with an Application to the Borda Electoral Competition Game," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 129-137, March.
    9. Daniel R. Carroll & Jim Dolmas & Eric Young, 2015. "Majority Voting: A Quantitative Investigation," Working Papers (Old Series) 1442, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    10. Vincent Anesi, 2012. "A new old solution for weak tournaments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(4), pages 919-930, October.
    11. Elham Nikram & Dieter Balkenborg, 2024. "A generalized Hotelling–Downs model with asymmetric candidates," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 26(1), February.
    12. Hao Wu & Rene van den Brink & Arantza Estevez-Fernandez, 2022. "The locally partial permission value for games with a permission structure," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 22-037/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    13. De Donder, Philippe & Hindriks, Jean, 2003. "The politics of progressive income taxation with incentive effects," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(11), pages 2491-2505, October.
    14. Josep E., Peris & Begoña, Subiza, 2015. "Rationalizable Choice and Standards of Behavior," QM&ET Working Papers 15-5, University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory.
    15. Laffond G. & Laslier, J. F. & Le Breton, M., 1996. "Condorcet choice correspondences: A set-theoretical comparison," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 59-59, February.
    16. Myerson, Roger B., 2013. "Fundamentals of Social Choice Theory," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 8(3), pages 305-337, June.
    17. René van den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Frank Steffen, 2009. "Measuring Power and Satisfaction in Societies with Opinion Leaders: Dictator and Opinion Leader Properties," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-052/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    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. 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.
    20. Quant, M. & Borm, P.E.M. & Reijnierse, J.H. & Voorneveld, M., 2002. "Characterizations of Solutions in Digraph Competitions," Discussion Paper 2002-113, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.

    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:tiu:tiutis:03637fc0-696b-4b91-b292-d0e789c88185. 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: Richard Broekman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/about/schools/economics-and-management/ .

    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.