|
Equitability
Equitability is a criterion for fair division. A division is called equitable if the subjective value of all partners is the same, i.e., each partner is equally happy with his/her share. Mathematically, that means that for all partners and : : V_i(X_i) = V_j(X_j) Where: * X_i is the part of the resource allocated to partner ; * V_i is the value function of partner . Usually these functions are normalized such that V_i(\emptyset)=0 and V_i(EntireCake)=1 for every . Comparison to other criteria * Equitability (EQ) compares values of ''different'' people to ''different'' pieces; * Envy-freeness (EF) compares values of ''the same'' person to ''different'' pieces; * Exact division (EX) compares values of ''different'' people to ''the same'' pieces. The following table illustrates the difference. In all examples there are two partners, Alice and Bob. Alice receives the left part and Bob receives the right part. Note that the table has only 6 rows, because 2 combinations are impos ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Adjusted Winner Procedure
Adjusted Winner (AW) is a procedure for envy-free item allocation. Given two agents and some goods, it returns a partition of the goods between the two agents with the following properties: # Envy-freeness: Each agent believes that his share of the goods is at least as good as the other share; # Equitable division, Equitability: The "relative happiness levels" of both agents from their shares are equal; # Pareto-optimality: no other allocation is better for one agent and at least as good for the other agent; # At most one good has to be shared between the agents. For two agents, Adjusted Winner is the only Pareto optimal and equitable procedure that divides at most a single good. The procedure can be used in divorce settlements and partnership dissolutions, as well as international conflicts. The procedure was designed by Steven Brams and Alan D. Taylor. It was first published in their book on fair division and later in a stand-alone book. The algorithm has been commercialized t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Fair Division
Fair division is the problem in game theory of dividing a set of resources among several people who have an entitlement to them so that each person receives their due share. That problem arises in various real-world settings such as division of inheritance, partnership dissolutions, divorce settlements, electronic frequency allocation, airport traffic management, and exploitation of Earth observation satellites. It is an active research area in mathematics, economics (especially social choice theory), dispute resolution, etc. The central tenet of fair division is that such a division should be performed by the players themselves, maybe using a mediator but certainly not an arbiter as only the players really know how they value the goods. The archetypal fair division algorithm is divide and choose. It demonstrates that two agents with different tastes can divide a cake such that each of them believes that he got the best piece. The research in fair division can be seen as an exten ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Envy-freeness
Envy-freeness, also known as no-envy, is a criterion for fair division. It says that, when resources are allocated among people with equal rights, each person should receive a share that is, in their eyes, at least as good as the share received by any other agent. In other words, no person should feel envy. General definitions Suppose a certain resource is divided among several agents, such that every agent i receives a share X_i. Every agent i has a personal preference relation \succeq_i over different possible shares. The division is called envy-free (EF) if for all i and j: :::X_i \succeq_i X_j Another term for envy-freeness is no-envy (NE). If the preference of the agents are represented by a value functions V_i, then this definition is equivalent to: :::V_i(X_i) \geq V_i(X_j) Put another way: we say that agent i ''envies'' agent j if i prefers the piece of j over his own piece, i.e.: :::X_i \prec_i X_j :::V_i(X_i) 2 the problem is much harder. See envy-free cake-cutting. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Exact Division
Exact division, also called consensus division, is a partition of a continuous resource (" cake") into some ''k'' pieces, such that each of ''n'' people with different tastes agree on the value of each of the pieces. For example, consider a cake which is half chocolate and half vanilla. Alice values only the chocolate and George values only the vanilla. The cake is divided into three pieces: one piece contains 20% of the chocolate and 20% of the vanilla, the second contains 50% of the chocolate and 50% of the vanilla, and the third contains the rest of the cake. This is an exact division (with ''k''=3 and ''n''=2), as both Alice and George value the three pieces as 20%, 50% and 30% respectively. Several common variants and special cases are known by different terms: * Consensus halving – the cake should be partitioned into two pieces (''k''=2), and all agents agree that the pieces have equal values. *Consensus 1/''k''-division, for any constant ''k''>1 - the cake should be partition ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Equitable Cake-cutting
Equitable (EQ) cake-cutting is a kind of a fair cake-cutting problem, in which the fairness criterion is equitability. It is a cake-allocation in which the subjective value of all partners is the same, i.e., each partner is equally happy with his/her share. Mathematically, that means that for all partners and : :V_i(X_i) = V_j(X_j) Where: *X_i is the piece of cake allocated to partner ; *V_i is the value measure of partner . It is a real-valued function that, for every piece of cake, returns a number that represents the utility of partner from that piece. Usually these functions are normalized such that V_i(\emptyset)=0 and V_i(EntireCake)=1 for every . See the page on equitability for examples and comparison to other fairness criteria. Finding an equitable cake-cutting for two partners One cut - full revelation When there are 2 partners, it is possible to get an EQ division with a single cut, but it requires full knowledge of the partners' valuations. Assume that the cake i ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Fair Item Allocation
Fair item allocation is a kind of a fair division problem in which the items to divide are ''discrete'' rather than continuous. The items have to be divided among several partners who value them differently, and each item has to be given as a whole to a single person. This situation arises in various real-life scenarios: * Several heirs want to divide the inherited property, which contains e.g. a house, a car, a piano and several paintings. * Several lecturers want to divide the courses given in their faculty. Each lecturer can teach one or more whole courses. *White elephant gift exchange parties The indivisibility of the items implies that a fair division may not be possible. As an extreme example, if there is only a single item (e.g. a house), it must be given to a single partner, but this is not fair to the other partners. This is in contrast to the fair cake-cutting problem, where the dividend is divisible and a fair division always exists. In some cases, the indivisibility pr ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
