多类型住房市场的类型化顶部交易-周期机制特征

IF 1 3区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS Games and Economic Behavior Pub Date : 2024-05-20 DOI:10.1016/j.geb.2024.04.010
Di Feng , Bettina Klaus , Flip Klijn
{"title":"多类型住房市场的类型化顶部交易-周期机制特征","authors":"Di Feng ,&nbsp;Bettina Klaus ,&nbsp;Flip Klijn","doi":"10.1016/j.geb.2024.04.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We consider the generalization of the classical Shapley and Scarf housing market model (<span>Shapley and Scarf, 1974</span>) to so-called multiple-type housing markets (<span>Moulin, 1995</span>). Throughout the paper, we focus on strict preferences. When preferences are separable, the prominent solution for these markets is the typewise top-trading-cycles (tTTC) mechanism.</p><p>We first show that for lexicographic preferences, a mechanism is <em>unanimous</em> (or <em>onto</em>), <em>individually rational</em>, <em>strategy-proof</em>, and <em>non-bossy</em> if and only if it is the tTTC mechanism. Second, we obtain a corresponding characterization for separable preferences. We obtain additional characterizations when replacing [<em>strategy-proofness</em> and <em>non-bossiness</em>] with <em>self-enforcing group</em> (or <em>pairwise</em>) <em>strategy-proofness</em>. Finally, we show that for strict preferences, there is no mechanism satisfying <em>unanimity</em>, <em>individual rationality</em>, and <em>strategy-proofness</em>.</p><p>Our characterizations of the tTTC mechanism constitute the first characterizations of an extension of the prominent top-trading-cycles (TTC) mechanism to multiple-type housing markets.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48291,"journal":{"name":"Games and Economic Behavior","volume":"146 ","pages":"Pages 234-254"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825624000599/pdfft?md5=0ee30d9c980a752692f9e6ac827f71ba&pid=1-s2.0-S0899825624000599-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Characterizing the typewise top-trading-cycles mechanism for multiple-type housing markets\",\"authors\":\"Di Feng ,&nbsp;Bettina Klaus ,&nbsp;Flip Klijn\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.geb.2024.04.010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We consider the generalization of the classical Shapley and Scarf housing market model (<span>Shapley and Scarf, 1974</span>) to so-called multiple-type housing markets (<span>Moulin, 1995</span>). Throughout the paper, we focus on strict preferences. When preferences are separable, the prominent solution for these markets is the typewise top-trading-cycles (tTTC) mechanism.</p><p>We first show that for lexicographic preferences, a mechanism is <em>unanimous</em> (or <em>onto</em>), <em>individually rational</em>, <em>strategy-proof</em>, and <em>non-bossy</em> if and only if it is the tTTC mechanism. Second, we obtain a corresponding characterization for separable preferences. We obtain additional characterizations when replacing [<em>strategy-proofness</em> and <em>non-bossiness</em>] with <em>self-enforcing group</em> (or <em>pairwise</em>) <em>strategy-proofness</em>. Finally, we show that for strict preferences, there is no mechanism satisfying <em>unanimity</em>, <em>individual rationality</em>, and <em>strategy-proofness</em>.</p><p>Our characterizations of the tTTC mechanism constitute the first characterizations of an extension of the prominent top-trading-cycles (TTC) mechanism to multiple-type housing markets.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Games and Economic Behavior\",\"volume\":\"146 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 234-254\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825624000599/pdfft?md5=0ee30d9c980a752692f9e6ac827f71ba&pid=1-s2.0-S0899825624000599-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Games and Economic Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825624000599\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Games and Economic Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825624000599","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们考虑将经典的 Shapley 和 Scarf 住房市场模型(Shapley 和 Scarf,1974 年)推广到所谓的多类型住房市场(Moulin,1995 年)。在本文中,我们始终关注严格偏好。我们首先证明,对于词法偏好,如果且仅当一个机制是 tTTC 机制时,该机制才是一致的(或对等的)、个体理性的、防策略的和非老板的。其次,我们得到了可分离偏好的相应特征。如果把[策略证明性和非老板性]替换为自我强化的群体(或成对)策略证明性,我们还能得到其他特征。最后,我们证明了对于严格偏好,不存在满足一致性、个体理性和策略防弊性的机制。我们对 tTTC 机制的描述是对著名的顶层交易循环(TTC)机制扩展到多类型住房市场的首次描述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Characterizing the typewise top-trading-cycles mechanism for multiple-type housing markets

We consider the generalization of the classical Shapley and Scarf housing market model (Shapley and Scarf, 1974) to so-called multiple-type housing markets (Moulin, 1995). Throughout the paper, we focus on strict preferences. When preferences are separable, the prominent solution for these markets is the typewise top-trading-cycles (tTTC) mechanism.

We first show that for lexicographic preferences, a mechanism is unanimous (or onto), individually rational, strategy-proof, and non-bossy if and only if it is the tTTC mechanism. Second, we obtain a corresponding characterization for separable preferences. We obtain additional characterizations when replacing [strategy-proofness and non-bossiness] with self-enforcing group (or pairwise) strategy-proofness. Finally, we show that for strict preferences, there is no mechanism satisfying unanimity, individual rationality, and strategy-proofness.

Our characterizations of the tTTC mechanism constitute the first characterizations of an extension of the prominent top-trading-cycles (TTC) mechanism to multiple-type housing markets.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
148
期刊介绍: Games and Economic Behavior facilitates cross-fertilization between theories and applications of game theoretic reasoning. It consistently attracts the best quality and most creative papers in interdisciplinary studies within the social, biological, and mathematical sciences. Most readers recognize it as the leading journal in game theory. Research Areas Include: • Game theory • Economics • Political science • Biology • Computer science • Mathematics • Psychology
期刊最新文献
Strategic behavior in one-to-one matching markets without outside options Cooperating with yourself Risk preferences of learning algorithms Complete conditional type structures Inference from biased polls
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1