Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.09899

Recovering Weighted Shapley Values from Position Preferences

Sinan Ertemel
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Weighted Shapley values represent asymmetry through positive weights and ordered priority classes. We give these parameters a preference interpretation in Roth's framework of lotteries over positions in transferable-utility games. Under common calibration, nullity, ordinary risk neutrality, unanimity efficiency, and unanimity positivity, position values in unanimity games are probability equivalents. Luce conditioning of these probabilities characterizes the Kalai-Samet family and is equivalent to partnership consistency. We separate conditioning into transitivity of revealed priority, pairwise determination of support, and invariance of positive odds. Two-player observations admit a weighted Shapley extension exactly when revealed priority is transitive and within-class odds satisfy a product rule. The extension is unique: pairwise comparisons identify the priority classes and weight ratios within each class. Larger unanimity games provide additional restrictions on supports and shares. We give constructive proofs, establish independence of the five axioms, and explain the scope and limits of the elicitation interpretation.

Explore related subjects

econ.TH

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Sinan Ertemel. 2026-10-07. Recovering Weighted Shapley Values from Position Preferences. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.09899

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Learning about informativeness

We study whether individuals can learn the informativeness of their information technology through social learning. As in the classic sequential social learning model, rational agents arrive in order and make decisions based on the past actions of others and their private signals. There is uncertainty regarding the informativeness of the common signal-generating process. We show that in this setting asymptotic learning about informativeness is not guaranteed and depends crucially on the relative tail distributions of private beliefs induced by uninformative and informative signals. We identify the phenomenon of perpetual disagreement as the cause of learning and characterize learning in the canonical Gaussian environment.

econ.TH↗
arXiv2026

Justifiable Priority Violations

Making Deferred Acceptance more efficient requires priority violations, but which ones are justifiable? We argue that a priority can be justifiably violated if the affected student either (i) directly benefits from the improvement that caused said violation, or (ii) is unimprovable under any assignment that Pareto-dominates DA. We construct a ``just-below-cutoffs'' mechanism that always finds a justifiable DA-improvement whenever DA's outcome is inefficient, and build on it to construct an algorithm that expands justifiable improvements iteratively, converging to a matching that cannot be Pareto-improved by any justifiable outcome. Finally, we prove that both justifiability and consent frameworks have important limitations in reaching Pareto-efficient outcomes, and use data and simulations to quantify how binding these constraints are in practice.

econ.TH↗
arXiv2026

The Empirical Content of Reputation Effects

I revisit the classic reputation model in which a long-lived player, either normal or committed, faces short-lived players who may misspecify the commitment-type signal process. I show that the long-lived player's patience makes reputation powerful but leaves its value sensitive both to short-lived players' subjective commitment-type signal process and to discounting. Every subjective process is arbitrarily close over any fixed horizon to processes eliminating his reputation gains and also to processes preserving them. Moreover, generically, all equilibria yield substantial gains along some discount-factor sequences approaching one, while even the best equilibrium yields no positive gain in the limit along others.

econ.TH↗