Chapter 14 Methods of Fair Division. Chapter 14: Methods of Fair Division Part 1 The Adjusted Winner Procedure.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LIAL HORNSBY SCHNEIDER
Advertisements

Fake coin detection. Fake coins Suppose we have a number of coins, at most one is fake (i.e. either one is fake or none is fake). You have a pair of scales.
SORTING ROUTINES. OBJECTIVES INTRODUCTION BUBBLE SORT SELECTION SORT INSERTION SORT QUICK SORT MERGE SORT.
QUICK MATH REVIEW & TIPS 3 Step into Algebra and Conquer it.
DM.7.  This procedure is for handling property settlements in a divorce or in an inheritance involving only two heirs.  Theorem: For two parties, the.
Selfridge-Conway Fair Division Procedure An Envy-Free Cake Division Procedure.
Chapter 13: Fair Division Lesson Plan
5.2 Rational Functions and Asymptotes
LIAL HORNSBY SCHNEIDER
Algebra Problems… Solutions Algebra Problems… Solutions © 2007 Herbert I. Gross Set 4 By Herb I. Gross and Richard A. Medeiros next.
Algebra Problems… Solutions Algebra Problems… Solutions © 2007 Herbert I. Gross Set 22 By Herbert I. Gross and Richard A. Medeiros next.
1-1 Copyright © 2015, 2010, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 18, Slide 1 Chapter 18 Confidence Intervals for Proportions.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
Chapter 14: Fair Division
Exponential Growth.
Linear Systems The definition of a linear equation given in Chapter 1 can be extended to more variables; any equation of the form for real numbers.
LIAL HORNSBY SCHNEIDER
Integers and Introduction to Solving Equations
Algebra Problems… Solutions
Introduction While it may not be efficient to write out the justification for each step when solving equations, it is important to remember that the properties.
Chapter 4 Section 1 Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc.
Copyright © 2013, 2009, 2005 Pearson Education, Inc. 1 5 Systems and Matrices Copyright © 2013, 2009, 2005 Pearson Education, Inc.
LINEAR PROGRAMMING SIMPLEX METHOD.
McGraw-Hill/IrwinCopyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Chapter 9 Hypothesis Testing.
Mathematics Mean, Median, Mode, Range Science and Mathematics Education Research Group Supported by UBC Teaching and Learning Enhancement Fund
Key Stone Problem… Key Stone Problem… next Set 22 © 2007 Herbert I. Gross.
Chapter 15: Apportionment
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2007 Appendix D Accounting for Partnerships.
Copyright 2013, 2010, 2007, Pearson, Education, Inc. Section 15.3 Apportionment Methods.
Chapter 15: Apportionment
Introduction to Pharmaceutical Calculation
Chapter 08 Risk and Rate of Return
Copyright © 2013, 2009, 2005 Pearson Education, Inc. 1 5 Systems and Matrices Copyright © 2013, 2009, 2005 Pearson Education, Inc.
Chapter 14: Fair Division Part 4 – Divide and Choose for more than two players.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. 4 Quadratic Functions.
Partial Fractions Day 2 Chapter 7.4 April 3, 2006.
Chapter 14: Fair Division Part 5 – Defining Fairness.
HAWKES LEARNING SYSTEMS Students Matter. Success Counts. Copyright © 2013 by Hawkes Learning Systems/Quant Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Section 2.1.
Common Fractions © Math As A Second Language All Rights Reserved next #6 Taking the Fear out of Math 1 3 ×1 3 Multiplying.
Chapter 14 – Fair Division Part 2: The Knaster Inheritance Procedure.
Chapter 3 Fair Division.
ALGEBRA II CONVERGENT GEOMETRIC SERIES.
UNIT 5.  The related activities of sorting, searching and merging are central to many computer applications.  Sorting and merging provide us with a.
Chapter 2.2 The Multiplication Principle of Equality.
1 © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved Chapter 3 Polynomial and Rational Functions.
Multiplication of Common Fractions © Math As A Second Language All Rights Reserved next #6 Taking the Fear out of Math 1 3 ×1 3 Applying.
Copyright ©2015 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Fair Division Algorithms
How Projects Get Started Conducting a Project Assessment 1.
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2005 McGraw-Hill/Irwin Accounting for Partnerships Chapter 12.
Copyright © 2006 Brooks/Cole, a division of Thomson Learning, Inc. Linear Programming: An Algebraic Approach 4 The Simplex Method with Standard Maximization.
Presented by: Dr Eman Morsi Decibel Conversion. The use of decibels is widespread throughout the electronics industry. Many electronic instruments are.
Copyright © 2013, 2009, 2005 Pearson Education, Inc. 1 3 Polynomial and Rational Functions Copyright © 2013, 2009, 2005 Pearson Education, Inc.
Chapter 4: Measures of Central Tendency. Measures of central tendency are important descriptive measures that summarize a distribution of different categories.
Chapter 6: Comparison and Selection Among Alternatives
The Simplex Method The geometric method of solving linear programming problems presented before. The graphical method is useful only for problems involving.
Solve Systems of Linear Equations by Elimination
Chapter 6: Comparison and Selection Among Alternatives
Introduction While it may not be efficient to write out the justification for each step when solving equations, it is important to remember that the properties.
Chapter 3 The Simplex Method and Sensitivity Analysis
Lial/Hungerford/Holcomb/Mullins: Mathematics with Applications 11e Finite Mathematics with Applications 11e Copyright ©2015 Pearson Education, Inc. All.
Section 15.3 Apportionment Methods
The Simplex Method The geometric method of solving linear programming problems presented before. The graphical method is useful only for problems involving.
Solving Systems of Equations
the ADJUSTED Winner (SOL: DM.7)
Equivalent Fractions One Whole 1.
the ADJUSTED Winner (SOL: DM.7)
The ADJUSTED Winner & Practice: Fair Division, LoNE-Divider, & Divider Chooser Method (Txt: & SOL: DM.7) Classwork:
Chapter 6: Comparison and Selection Among Alternatives
Frequency Distributions
Presentation transcript:

Chapter 14 Methods of Fair Division

Chapter 14: Methods of Fair Division Part 1 The Adjusted Winner Procedure

Adjusted Winner Procedure We are given a discrete set of items (objects and/or issues). There are two interested parties with equal claim to the set of items. The adjusted winner procedure provides a method to divide up the items among the interested parties in a way that both will consider fair. It might happen that one item will need to be divided among the two parties.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 Example #1 Calvin and Hobbes find a buried treasure. The items they find are as follows: Cannon, Anchor, Treasure Chest, Doubloon, Figurehead, Sword, Cannon Ball, Wooden Leg, Flag, Crow’s Nest Calvin and Hobbes each have equal claim to the treasure and decide to use the adjusted winner procedure to divide up these objects among themselves.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 The procedure begins with each party distributing a total of 100 points among the given items. Higher point assignments mean an item is valued more by that party. CalvinHobbes Cannon105 Anchor1020 Chest1520 Doubloon1114 Figurehead2030 Sword156 Cannon ball51 Wooden leg21 Flag102 Crows nest21 Suppose Calvin and Hobbes each distribute their 100 points as given in the table.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 We go through the list of items and initially divide the items among the two parties according to who had placed a higher point value on each item. The adjusted winner procedure could stop here if each party receives an equal number of points. Goes toCalvinHobbes CannonCalvin105 AnchorHobbes1020 ChestHobbes1520 DoubloonHobbes1114 FigureheadHobbes2030 SwordCalvin156 Cannon ballCalvin51 Wooden legCalvin21 FlagCalvin102 Crows nestCalvin21

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 Generally the point totals received by each party will not equal - as in this case. The totals listed at the bottom of the table indicate the total points received by each party according to that party’s initial point distribution. CalvinHobbes Cannon (10) Anchor (20) Chest (20) Doubloon (14) Figurehead (30) Sword (15) Cannon ball (5) Wooden leg (2) Flag (10) Crows nest (2) Total = 44Total = 84 Note that point values are based on that party’s valuation of a given item. If there are any items that both parties valued equally, we transfer those items to the party with the smaller point total. If a fraction of an item had to be transferred at this stage to make the totals equal, we would use the algebraic process shown later in this example. Because the point totals are not equal, we will now begin to transfer items, or a part of one item, from one party to the other to equalize the point totals.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 CalvinHobbes Cannon (10) Anchor (20) Chest (20) Doubloon (14) Figurehead (30) Sword (15) Cannon ball (5) Wooden leg (2) Flag (10) Crows nest (2) Total = 44Total = 84 CalvinHobbesPoint ratio Anchor102020/10 =2 Chest152020/15=1.33 Doubloon111414/11=1.27 Figurehead203030/20=1.5 Point ratio = ( A’s valuation / B’s valuation ) where A is the party with the greater point total, in this case Hobbes. Notice that because we will only transfer items from Hobbes to Calvin, we calculate point ratios for items belonging to Hobbes only.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 CalvinHobbes Cannon (10) Anchor (20) Chest (20) Doubloon (14) Figurehead (30) Sword (15) Cannon ball (5) Wooden leg (2) Flag (10) Crows nest (2) Total = 44Total = 84 CalvinHobbesPoint ratio Anchor102020/10 =2 Chest152020/15=1.33 Doubloon111414/11=1.27 Figurehead203030/20=1.5 We are interested only in the point ratios for items belonging to Hobbes. Following the adjusted winner procedure, we will transfer items from Hobbes to Calvin in order of increasing point ratio (from smallest to largest point ratio). Because it has the lowest point ratio, we transfer the Doubloon first.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 CalvinHobbes Cannon (10) Anchor (20) Chest (20) Doubloon (11) Figurehead (30) Sword (15) Cannon ball (5) Wooden leg (2) Flag (10) Crows nest (2) Total = 55Total = 70 CalvinHobbesPoint ratio Anchor102020/10 =2 Chest152020/15=1.33 Doubloon111414/11=1.27 Figurehead203030/20=1.5 Notice the Doubloon was worth 14 to Hobbes but only 11 to Calvin. We adjust the point totals accordingly. We continue to transfer items from Hobbes to Calvin until the point totals are equal. By increasing point ratio, the next item to transfer will be the chest.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 CalvinHobbes Cannon (10) Anchor (20) Chest (20) Doubloon (11) Figurehead (30) Sword (15) Cannon ball (5) Wooden leg (2) Flag (10) Crows nest (2) Total = 55Total = 70 CalvinHobbesPoint ratio Anchor102020/10 =2 Chest152020/15=1.33 Doubloon111414/11=1.27 Figurehead203030/20=1.5 Note that if we transfer the entire chest from Hobbes to Calvin then Calvin (with 60) will have more points than Hobbes (with 50). Therefore, we will not transfer the entire chest to Calvin. We will use an algebraic procedure to find the fraction x of the chest that will be transferred from Hobbes to Calvin.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 CalvinHobbes Cannon (10) Anchor (20) Chest (20) Doubloon (11) Figurehead (30) Sword (15) Cannon ball (5) Wooden leg (2) Flag (10) Crows nest (2) Total = 55Total = 70 CalvinHobbesPoint ratio Anchor102020/10 =2 Chest152020/15=1.33 Doubloon111414/11=1.27 Figurehead203030/20=1.5 Let x be the fraction of the chest that Hobbes will keep and therefore 1 – x will represent the fraction that Calvin will receive. For example, if x = 2/3 then 1 – x = 1/3. In the transfer of the chest, Hobbes will keep 20x points from the chest and Calvin will receive 15(1-x) points.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 CalvinHobbes Cannon (10) Anchor (20) Chest (20) Doubloon (11) Figurehead (30) Sword (15) Cannon ball (5) Wooden leg (2) Flag (10) Crows nest (2) Total = 55Total = 70 CalvinHobbesPoint ratio Anchor102020/10 =2 Chest152020/15=1.33 Doubloon111414/11=1.27 Figurehead203030/20=1.5 Note that Calvin currently has 55 points and will receive 15(1-x) points. Note that Hobbes has 50 points plus will keep some portion of the chest, which is represented by 20x. To equate the point totals, we write the equation: (1-x) = x

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 Now, solving this linear equation, we get … (1-x) = x – 15x = x 70 – 15x = x 20 = 35x x = 20/35 x = 4/7 Therefore, Hobbes will keep 4/7 of the chest and Calvin will receive 3/7 of the chest.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 Notice the significance of the solution to this equation … Given the equation: (1-x) = x If x = 4/7 then each side becomes … (3/7) = (4/7) 61.43=61.43 Each party will receive an equal number of points. This is where the adjusted winner procedure ends, with a partial transfer of the chest, all of the items have been divided in a way that each party will consider equitable.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #1 The result of the adjusted winner procedure is the distribution of items as shown in the table. Calvin gets the cannon, doubloon, sword, cannon ball, wooden leg, flag, crow’s nest and 3/7 ths of the chest. Hobbes gets the anchor, figurehead and 4/7 ths of the chest. CalvinHobbes Cannon (10) Anchor (20) Chest (15)(3/7)Chest (20)(4/7) Doubloon (11) Figurehead (30) Sword (15) Cannon ball (5) Wooden leg (2) Flag (10) Crows nest (2) Total = 61.43

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 Example #2: A Corporate Merger Suppose two companies will negotiate a merger and must agree on the following issues: Company name, location of headquarters, choosing a chairperson, choosing a chief executive officer, deciding which company will face layoffs from any redundancies. These companies could use the adjusted winner procedure to facilitate the negotiations.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 Example #2: A Corporate Merger Suppose these companies distribute their 100 points as shown below based on their priorities in the negotiations. IssueABC, Co.XYZ, Inc. Name4020 Headquarters1025 Chairperson510 CEO30 Layoffs15 totals100

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 We initially give each item to the party who gave that item the higher point value. IssueABC, Co.XYZ, Inc.Goes to … Name4020ABC, Co. Headquarters1025XYZ, Inc. Chairperson510XYZ, Inc. CEO30 Not distributed yet Layoffs15 Not distributed yet totals100

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 Without yet distributing those items that were valued equally, we see that XYZ currently has the lower point total. ABC, Co.XYZ, Inc. Name (40)HQ (25) Chair (10) Total = 40Total = 35 Note that, in this example, there are still two items (CEO and Layoffs) to be distributed. We could interrupt the adjusted winner procedure and end the negotiations if it was possible to distribute those items in such a way as to make the point totals equal. However, in this case that is not possible. We continue with the adjusted winner procedure and, initially, give both of the remaining items to XYZ, Inc.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 Because XYZ initially had the lower point total, they receive both items which were equally valued. Now we decide which items will be transferred from XYZ to ABC. ABC, Co.XYZ, Inc. Name (40)HQ (25) Chair (10) CEO (30) Layoffs (15) Total = 40Total = 80 We calculate point ratios for items currently belonging to XYZ by calculating XYZ’s valuation divided by ABC’s valuation of each item. HQ = 25/10 = 2.5 Chair = 10/5 = 2 CEO = 30/30 = 1 Layoffs = 15/15 = 1

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 We have point ratios of … HQ = 25/10 = 2.5 Chair = 10/5 = 2 CEO = 30/30 = 1 Layoffs = 15/15 = 1 ABC, Co.XYZ, Inc. Name (40)HQ (25) Chair (10) CEO (30) Layoffs (15) Total = 40Total = 80 Both items CEO and Layoffs have equal point ratio, and we must decide which item will be transferred first. Following the adjusted winner procedure, we can not transfer the CEO item first. This is because then ABC would have more points than XYZ and we’d then need to transfer points back to XYZ, which is not consistent with the adjusted winner procedure. Following the adjusted winner procedure we will only transfer points in one direction until equality is achieved.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 We have point ratios of … HQ = 25/10 = 2.5 Chair = 10/5 = 2 CEO = 30/30 = 1 Layoffs = 15/15 = 1 ABC, Co.XYZ, Inc. Name (40)HQ (25) Chair (10) CEO (30) Layoffs (15) Total = 55Total = 65 Following the adjusted winner procedure, we will transfer the item Layoffs first and then determine a partial transfer of the item CEO. In a realistic situation, either the negotiations fail and the merger is cancelled (and at least the adjusted winner procedure quickly identified an incompatibility between the companies) or some negotiations are needed beyond the adjusted winner procedure.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 We have point ratios of … HQ = 25/10 = 2.5 Chair = 10/5 = 2 CEO = 30/30 = 1 Layoffs = 15/15 = 1 ABC, Co.XYZ, Inc. Name (40)HQ (25) Chair (10) CEO (30) Layoffs (15) Total = 55Total = 65 It may be possible to reach an agreement which in some way that provides for a compromise on the CEO issue. Following the adjusted winner procedure, we can determine a fraction representing what we could call “control” of the issue of the CEO for each company.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 We have point ratios of … HQ = 25/10 = 2.5 Chair = 10/5 = 2 CEO = 30/30 = 1 Layoffs = 15/15 = 1 ABC, Co.XYZ, Inc. Name (40)HQ (25) Chair (10) CEO (30) Layoffs (15) Total = 55Total = 65 We will say that XYZ, Inc., will retain some fraction of the CEO issue, which we can call x. Then ABC, Co., receives the other fraction of the issue, which would be 1 – x. To equate point totals we write the following equation: (1-x) = x

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 Now, solving for x, we get … (1-x) = x – 30x = x 85 – 30x = x 50 = 60x x = 50/60 = 5/6 The conclusion here is that XYZ will retain 5/6 of the CEO issue.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 ABC, Co.XYZ, Inc. Name (40)HQ (25) Chair (10) CEO (30)(1/6) = (5)CEO (30)(5/6) = (25) Layoffs (15) Total = 60 The conclusion of the adjusted winner procedure, in this example, is shown in the table. ABC, Co., is given ownership of the Name and Layoffs issues and a small part ownership in the issue of the CEO. XYZ, Inc., has ownership over the issue of the Headquarters and the Chairperson and the larger part of the ownership over the issue of the CEO. This conclusion can provide a guideline as to finalizing negotiations over the CEO.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 ABC, Co.XYZ, Inc. Name (40)HQ (25) Chair (10) CEO (30)(1/6) = (5)CEO (30)(5/6) = (25) Layoffs (15) Total = 60 The conclusion of the adjusted winner procedure, in this example, is shown in the table. Beyond the adjusted winner procedure, to finalize the negotiations, suppose, for example, that additional negotiations went as follows... Originally, ABC valued the chair at 5 points. Perhaps they would accept ownership of the chairperson issue in place of a 1/6 ownership in the CEO issue. In exchange for relinquishing the chair issue which XYZ valued at 10 points, XYZ could receive full ownership of the issue of the CEO and perhaps could negotiate some other consideration to make up for the loss of 5 points.

Adjusted Winner Procedure – Example #2 ABC, Co.XYZ, Inc. Name (40)HQ (25) Chair (5) CEO (30) Layoffs (12.5)Layoffs (2.5) Total = 57.5 Just for fun, we might imagine the table shown above as a possible resolution to the negotiations. Practically speaking, it may be easier to divide the issue of layoffs between the two companies. We could transfer back some points on the issue of layoffs to XYZ to make up for the deficit of 5 points in the agreement on Chair and CEO. A possible agreement? XYZ gets their way on their two biggest issues but will need to concede more on layoffs. ABC gets to decide the name, gets the chairperson, and has more control over layoffs