Skip to main content
Log in

Generating Functions for Computing the Myerson Value

  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The complexity of a computational problem is the order of computational resources which are necessary and sufficient to solve the problem. The algorithm complexity is the cost of a particular algorithm. We say that a problem has polynomial complexity if its computational complexity is a polynomial in the measure of input size. We introduce polynomial time algorithms based in generating functions for computing the Myerson value in weighted voting games restricted by a tree. Moreover, we apply the new generating algorithm for computing the Myerson value in the Council of Ministers of the European Union restricted by a communication structure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J.F. Banzhaf, Weighted voting doesn't work: a mathematical analysis, Rutgers Law Review 19 (1965) 317-343.

    Google Scholar 

  2. J.M. Bilbao, Values and potential of games with cooperation structure, International Journal of Game Theory 27 (1998) 131-145.

    Google Scholar 

  3. J.M. Bilbao, Cooperative Games on Combinatorial Structures (Kluwer Academic, Boston, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  4. M. Carter, Cooperative games, in: Economic and Financial Modeling with Mathematica, ed. H.R. Varian (Springer, Berlin, 1993) pp. 167-191.

    Google Scholar 

  5. P.H. Edelman and R.E. Jamison, The theory of convex geometries, Geometriae Dedicata 19 (1985) 247-270.

    Google Scholar 

  6. P. Gács and L. Lovász, Complexity of algorithms, Lecture Notes, Yale University (1999). Available at http://www.esi2.us.es/~mbilbao/pdffiles/complex.pdf.

  7. K. Herne and H. Nurmi, The distribution of a priori voting power in the EC Council of Ministers and the European Parliament, Scandinavian Political Studies 16 (1993) 269-284.

    Google Scholar 

  8. R.E. Jamison, Alternating Whitney sums and matchings in trees, Part I, Discrete Mathematics 67 (1987) 177-189.

    Google Scholar 

  9. R.E. Jamison, Alternating Whitney sums and matchings in trees, Part II, Discrete Mathematics 79 (1989/90) 177-189.

    Google Scholar 

  10. D.E. Knuth, Big omicron and big omega and big theta, ACM SIGACT News 8 (1976) 18-24.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J.E. Lane and R. Maeland, Voting power under the EU Constitution, Journal of Theoretical Politics 7 (1995) 223-230.

    Google Scholar 

  12. R.B. Myerson, Graphs and cooperation in games, Mathematics of Operations Research 2 (1977) 225-229.

    Google Scholar 

  13. G. Owen, Values of graph-restricted games, SIAM J. Algebraic and Discrete Methods 7 (1986) 210-220.

    Google Scholar 

  14. L.S. Shapley, A value for n-person games, Annals of Mathematical Studies 28 (1953) 307-317.

    Google Scholar 

  15. L.S. Shapley and M. Shubik, A method for evaluating the distribution of power in a committee system, American Political Science Review 48 (1954) 787-792.

    Google Scholar 

  16. S. Skiena, Implementing Discrete Mathematics: Combinatorics and Graph Theory with Mathematica (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  17. R.P. Stanley, Enumerative Combinatorics, Vol. I (Wadsworth, Monterey, CA, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. Widgrén, Voting power in the EC decision making and the consequences of two different enlargements, European Economic Review 38 (1994) 1153-1170.

    Google Scholar 

  19. S.Wolfram, Mathematica: A System for Doing Mathematics by Computer (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fernández, J., Algaba, E., Bilbao, J. et al. Generating Functions for Computing the Myerson Value. Annals of Operations Research 109, 143–158 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016348001805

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016348001805

Navigation