Axiomatizations of the core

Publisher Summary The core is, the most intuitive solution concept in cooperative game theory. An intuitively acceptable axiom system for the core might reinforce its position as the most natural" solution. An axiomatization of the core may serve two other, more important goals: (1) by obtaining axioms for the core, those important properties of solutions are singled out that determine the most stable solution in the theory of cooperative games. Thus, the core of transferable utility (TU) games is determined by individual rationality (IR), superadditivity (SUPA), and the reduced garne property (RGP). Also, the core of non-transferable utility (NTU) garnes is characterized by IR and RGP. Furthermore, the converse reduced game property (CRGP) is essential for the axiomatization of the core of TU market games. Four properties, IR, SUPA, RGP, and CRGP, play an important role in the characterization of the core on some important families of games. A solution is acceptable if its axiomatization is similar to that of the core. There are some important examples of this kind: (a) the prenucleolus is characterized by RGP together with the two standard assumptions of symmetry and covariance, (b) the Shapley value is characterized by SUPA and three more weaker axioms, and (c) the prekernel is determined by RGP, CRGP, and three more standard assumptions. The chapter discusses the TU games, several properties of solutions to coalitional games, an axiomatization of the core of balanced games, the core of market games, the results that are generalized to games with coalition structures, the results for NTU games, reduced games of NTU games, axiom system for the core of NTU games, and Keiding's axiomatization of the core of NTU games.

[1]  L. Shapley The Solutions of a Symmetric Market Game , 1958 .

[2]  L. Shapley,et al.  ON MARKET GAMES , 1969, Classics in Game Theory.

[3]  R. Aumann Value, Symmetry, and Equal Treatment: A Comment [Non-symmetric Cardinal Value Allocations] , 1987 .

[4]  R. Aumann,et al.  Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud , 1985 .

[5]  J. Nash THE BARGAINING PROBLEM , 1950, Classics in Game Theory.

[6]  J. Harsanyi A bargaining model for the cooperative n-person game , 1958 .

[7]  King Vidor,et al.  War and peace = 戦争と平和 , 1865 .

[8]  Joseph Greenberg,et al.  Cores of Convex Games Without Side Payments , 1985, Math. Oper. Res..

[9]  Morton D. Davis,et al.  The kernel of a cooperative game , 1965 .

[10]  Bezalel Peleg,et al.  An Axiomatization of the Core of Market Games , 1989, Math. Oper. Res..

[11]  Robert J. Aumann,et al.  AN AXIOMATIZATION OF THE NON-TRANSFERABLE UTILITY VALUE , 1985 .

[12]  William Thomson,et al.  Game-theoretic models of bargaining: Axiomatic theory of bargaining with a variable population: A survey of recent results , 1985 .

[13]  B. Peleg On the reduced game property and its converse , 1987 .

[14]  Michael Maschler,et al.  An advantage of the bargaining set over the core , 1976 .

[15]  Hans Keiding,et al.  An axiomatization of the core of a cooperative game , 1986 .

[16]  Lloyd S. Shapley,et al.  On balanced sets and cores , 1967 .

[17]  R. Aumann On the Non-transferable Utility Value: A Comment on the Roth-Shafer Examples [Values for Games without Side Payments: Some Difficulties with Current Concepts] [On the Existence and Interpretation of Value Allocations] , 1985 .

[18]  William Thomson,et al.  Monotonicity, stability and egalitarianism , 1984 .

[19]  K. Arrow Social Choice and Individual Values , 1951 .

[20]  Bezalel Peleg,et al.  A proof that the core of an ordinal convex game is a von Neumann-Morgenstern solution , 1986 .

[21]  Howard Raiffa,et al.  Games And Decisions , 1958 .

[22]  Bezalel Peleg,et al.  An axiomatization of the core of cooperative games without side payments , 1985 .

[23]  Terje Lensberg,et al.  Stability and the Nash solution , 1988 .