Strategy-proofness on Euclidean spaces

被引:0
|
作者
W. Peremans
H. Peters
H. v. d. Stel
T. Storcken
机构
[1] Department of Mathematics and Computing Science,
[2] Eindhoven University of Technology,undefined
[3] P.O. Box 513,undefined
[4] 5600 MB Eindhoven,undefined
[5] The Netherlands,undefined
[6] Department of Economics,undefined
[7] Limburg University,undefined
[8] P.O. Box 616,undefined
[9] 6200 MD Maastricht,undefined
[10] The Netherlands,undefined
来源
Social Choice and Welfare | 1997年 / 14卷
关键词
Euclidean Space; Good Choice; Minimal Distance; Good Alternative; Individual Preference;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
 In this paper we characterize strategy-proof voting schemes on Euclidean spaces. A voting scheme is strategy-proof whenever it is optimal for every agent to report his best alternative. Here the individual preferences underlying these best choices are separable and quadratic. It turns out that a voting scheme is strategy-proof if and only if (α) its range is a closed Cartesian subset of Euclidean space, (β) the outcomes are at a minimal distance to the outcome under a specific coordinatewise veto voting scheme, and (γ) it satisfies some monotonicity properties. Neither continuity nor decomposability is implied by strategy-proofness, but these are satisfied if we additionally impose Pareto-optimality or unanimity.
引用
收藏
页码:379 / 401
页数:22
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Strategy-proofness on Euclidean spaces
    Peremans, W
    Peters, H
    VanderStel, H
    Storcken, T
    [J]. SOCIAL CHOICE AND WELFARE, 1997, 14 (03) : 379 - 401
  • [2] A decomposition of strategy-proofness
    Nozomu Muto
    Shin Sato
    [J]. Social Choice and Welfare, 2016, 47 : 277 - 294
  • [3] Evaluationwise strategy-proofness
    Erdamar, Bora
    Sanver, M. Remzi
    Sato, Shin
    [J]. GAMES AND ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR, 2017, 106 : 227 - 238
  • [4] Strategy-proofness in the Large
    Azevedo, Eduardo M.
    Budish, Eric
    [J]. REVIEW OF ECONOMIC STUDIES, 2019, 86 (01): : 81 - 116
  • [5] A decomposition of strategy-proofness
    Muto, Nozomu
    Sato, Shin
    [J]. SOCIAL CHOICE AND WELFARE, 2016, 47 (02) : 277 - 294
  • [6] On the equivalence of strategy-proofness and upper contour strategy-proofness for randomized social choice functions
    Roy, Souvik
    Sadhukhan, Soumyarup
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL ECONOMICS, 2022, 99
  • [7] Strategy-proofness and markets
    Satterthwaite, MA
    [J]. SOCIAL CHOICE AND WELFARE, 2001, 18 (01) : 37 - 58
  • [8] Strategy-proofness and markets
    Mark A. Satterthwaite
    [J]. Social Choice and Welfare, 2001, 18 : 37 - 58
  • [9] Strategy-proofness and weighted voting
    Campbell, Donald E.
    Kelly, Jerry S.
    [J]. MATHEMATICAL SOCIAL SCIENCES, 2010, 60 (01) : 15 - 23
  • [10] The strategy-proofness landscape of merging
    Everaere, Patricia
    Konieczny, Sebastien
    Marquis, Pierre
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH, 2007, 28 (49-105): : 49 - 105