Ordinal power relations and social rankings
نویسندگان
چکیده
Several real-life complex systems, like human societies or economic networks, are formed by interacting units characterized by patterns of relationships that may generate a group-based social hierarchy. In this paper, we address the problem of how to rank the individuals with respect to their ability to “influence” the relative strength of groups in a society. We also analyse the effect of basic properties in the computation of a social ranking within specific classes of (ordinal) coalitional situations. We show that the pairwise combination of these natural properties yields either to impossibility (i.e., no social ranking exists), or to flattening (i.e., all the individuals are equally ranked), or to dictatorship (i.e., the social ranking is imposed by the relative comparison of coalitions of a given size).
منابع مشابه
An axiomatic approach to social ranking under coalitional power relations
In the literature of coalitional games, power indices have been widely used to assess the influence that a player has in situations where coalitions may be winning or losing. However, in many cases things are not so simple as that: in some practical situations, all that we know about coalitions is a relative comparison of strength. For instance, we know that a football team is stronger than ano...
متن کاملA Unified framework for Order-of-magnitude Confidence Relations
The aim of this work is to provide a uni ed framework for ordinal representations of unertainty lying at the rossroads between possibility and probability theories. Su h on den e relations between events are ommonly found in nonmonotoni reasoning, in onsisten y management, or qualitative de ision theory. They start either from probability theory, making it more qualitative, or from possibility ...
متن کاملDynamic programming methodology for multi-criteria group decision-making under ordinal preferences
A method of minimizing rankings inconsistency is proposed for a decision-making problem with rankings of alternatives given by multiple decision makers according to multiple criteria. For each criteria, at first, the total inconsistency between the rankings of all alternatives for the group and the ones for every decision maker is defined after the decision maker weights in respect to the crite...
متن کاملGeneralized Discrete Preference Games
Recently, much attention has been devoted to discrete preference games to model the formation of opinions in social networks. More specifically, these games model the agents’ strategic decision of expressing publicly an opinion, which is a result of an interplay between the agent’s private belief and the social pressure. However, these games have very limited expressive power; they can model on...
متن کاملRanking Law Journals and the Limits of Journal Citation Reports
Rankings of schools, scholars, and journals emphasize ordinal rank. Journal rankings published by Journal Citation Reports (JCR) are widely used to assess research quality, which influences important decisions by academic departments, universities, and countries. We study refereed law journal rankings by JCR, Washington and Lee Law Library (W&L), and the Australian Research Council (ARC). Both ...
متن کامل