IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/qmsrps/202206.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Generalised Gately Values of Cooperative Games

Author

Listed:
  • Gilles, Robert P.
  • Mallozzi, Lina

Abstract

We investigate Gately's solution concept for cooperative games with transferable utilities. Gately's conception is a bargaining solution and minimises the maximal quantified 'propensity to disrupt' the negotiation of the players over the allocation of the generated collective payoffs. Gately's solution concept is well-defined for a broad class of games. We consider a generalisation based on a parameter-based quantification of the propensity to disrupt. Furthermore, we investigate the relationship of these generalised Gately values with the Core. Gately's solution is in the Core for all regular 3-player games. We identify precise conditions under which generalised Gately values are Core imputations for arbitrary regular cooperative games. We devise an axiomatisation of the Gately value for the class of regular cooperative games. We conclude the paper with an application of the Gately value to the measurement of power in hierarchical social networks.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:qmsrps:202206
    DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.4232786
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/271261/1/qms-rp2022-06.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2139/ssrn.4232786?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert P. Gilles, 2010. "The Cooperative Game Theory of Networks and Hierarchies," Theory and Decision Library C, Springer, number 978-3-642-05282-8, December.
    2. Gately, Dermot, 1974. "Sharing the Gains from Regional Cooperation: A Game Theoretic Application to Planning Investment in Electric Power," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 15(1), pages 195-208, February.
    3. Rodica Branzei & Dinko Dimitrov & Stef Tijs, 2008. "Models in Cooperative Game Theory," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-3-540-77954-4, December.
    4. René Brink & Yukihiko Funaki, 2009. "Axiomatizations of a Class of Equal Surplus Sharing Solutions for TU-Games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 67(3), pages 303-340, September.
    5. Peter Borm & René van den Brink & Marco Slikker, 2002. "An Iterative Procedure for Evaluating Digraph Competitions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 61-75, January.
    6. 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.
    7. Lehrer, E, 1988. "An Axiomatization of the Banzhaf Value," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 17(2), pages 89-99.
    8. René van den Brink & Peter Borm, 2002. "Digraph Competitions and Cooperative Games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 327-342, December.
    9. Jochen Staudacher & Johannes Anwander, 2019. "Conditions for the uniqueness of the Gately point for cooperative games," Papers 1901.01485, arXiv.org.
    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. Robert P. Gilles & Lina Mallozzi, 2022. "Gately Values of Cooperative Games," Papers 2208.10189, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    2. Robert P. Gilles & Lina Mallozzi, 2023. "Game Theoretic Foundations of the Gately Power Measure for Directed Networks," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-19, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Lukáš Adam & Tomáš Kroupa, 2017. "The intermediate set and limiting superdifferential for coalitional games: between the core and the Weber set," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(4), pages 891-918, November.
    5. Sylvain Béal & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal, 2015. "Discounted Tree Solutions," Working Papers hal-01377923, HAL.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2010. "A model of influence in a social network," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 69-96, July.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. McQuillin, Ben & Sugden, Robert, 2018. "Balanced externalities and the Shapley value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 81-92.
    15. Kamijo, Yoshio & Kongo, Takumi, 2012. "Whose deletion does not affect your payoff? The difference between the Shapley value, the egalitarian value, the solidarity value, and the Banzhaf value," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(3), pages 638-646.
    16. Hafezalkotob, Ashkan & Makui, Ahmad, 2015. "Cooperative maximum-flow problem under uncertainty in logistic networks," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 593-604.
    17. Marco Slikker & Peter Borm & René Brink, 2012. "Internal slackening scoring methods," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 445-462, April.
    18. 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.
    19. Xun-Feng Hu & Deng-Feng Li, 2021. "The Equal Surplus Division Value for Cooperative Games with a Level Structure," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(6), pages 1315-1341, December.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cooperative TU-game; sharing values; Gately point; Core;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games

    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:zbw:qmsrps:202206. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dequbuk.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.