SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2505.21122

Sequential Elimination and Union Shapley Value for Group Assessment in Coalitional Games

Abstract

Two straightforward methods to extend an assessment of individual elements to groups are to sum individual assessments or to treat the group as a single merged element and assess it accordingly. In this work, we analyze another natural approach based on sequential elimination: elements of the group are removed one by one, and their assessments are aggregated. We study this approach in the context of coalitional games and show that, for almost all semivalues, it does not depend on the order of players. In particular, we introduce a new group value, called the Union Shapley Value, and investigate its axiomatic properties. Our results build on a comprehensive analysis of group values in coalitional games. Specifically, we define a class of group (weak consistent) semivalues - a variant of semivalues satisfying a weak form of monotonicity. This framework allows us to clarify the differences between existing notions in the literature. We show that existing group values either assess the total worth of a group or measure its synergy. We distinguish these two approaches axiomatically and uncover a connection between the corresponding values. In particular, we show that the well-known Interaction Index is a synergistic counterpart of the value introduced by Marichal et al., which corresponds to the merge approach. The analysis also yields new synergistic group values associated with the Union Shapley Value, which we call the Intersection Shapley Value. Our results demonstrate that the sequential extension - and the Union Shapley value in particular - constitute one of the most natural extensions of player values to groups in coalitional games.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Piotr Kępczyński, Oskar Skibski. 2025-05-27. Sequential Elimination and Union Shapley Value for Group Assessment in Coalitional Games. https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.21122

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

MMS Allocation for Chores with Online Agent Arrivals

We study the fair allocation of $m$ indivisible chores to $n$ agents with subadditive cost functions arriving online in an arbitrary order. Upon an agent's arrival, we are informed of her cost function and must irrevocably assign her a set of chores. We focus on the Maximin Share (MMS) fairness notion and aim to compute an allocation in which all items are assigned, and no agent incurs a cost more than $\alpha$ times her MMS. Without any prior information about the instance (other than $n$ and $m$), we design an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{n, k\log^{1+\epsilon}k, \log m\})$ for any constant $\epsilon > 0$, where $k$ denotes the number of cost function types. Our bound matches the best known offline approximation guarantees for MMS under subadditive costs and is nearly optimal with respect to all three parameters: we show that even for binary additive cost functions, no online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio of $o(\min\{n, k\log k, \log m\})$. We then consider the setting in which the $k$ cost function types are known in advance (though the realized types of arriving agents are not). For additive cost functions, we provide an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{\log k, \log(kn)/\log\log(kn)\})$, and show that constant-competitive algorithms do not exist for general $k$, even for the binary additive setting. For binary additive functions when $k \le n$, we propose a $3$-competitive algorithm and establish a lower bound of $2$.

cs.GT

Truncated Noisy Best-Response Algorithms: Toward Game Theoretic Learning with Safety Guarantees

We consider a game theoretic approach to solve multi-agent coordination problems with submodular maximization objectives. It is known for such problems that the Nash equilibria for the corresponding game are always within 50% of the optimal, but that the equilibria which achieve this worst-case bound are not stable. To exploit this instability, we propose a family of algorithms which we call Truncated Noisy Best-Response (TNBR) Algorithms. These algorithms are flexibly characterized by agents asynchronously and stochastically selecting actions from a neighbourhood of their best response payoffs. We compute bounds on the recurrent classes of TNBR algorithms' associated Markov chains. Our bounds fall into two categories: first, "Performance" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms always have a high-value recurrent state; second, "Safety" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms never have arbitrarily-bad recurrent states. Furthermore, these two types of bounds are linked by a waterbed-like effect: every game with a poor Safety guarantee necessarily has a favorable Performance guarantee.

cs.GT

Existence of the Core in Approval-Based Committee Elections

We settle the main open question in the theory of approval-based multi-winner elections: we show that there always exists a committee in the core. The core is a stability and group fairness concept. The proof introduces a new voting rule that optimizes an entropy-like objective function over committees and payment systems. All local optima of this objective function lie in the core, which implies that a core committee can be found in polynomial time.

cs.GT