Thuc Vu
Yoav Shoham
Abstract
We investigated the existence of fair seeding in knockout tournaments. We define two fairness criteria, both adapted from the literature: envy-freeness and order preservation. We show how to achieve the first criterion in tournaments whose structure is unconstrained, and prove an impossibility result for balanced tournaments. For the second criterion we have a similar result for unconstrained tournaments, but not for the balanced case. We provide instead a heuristic algorithm which we show through experiments to be efficient and effective. This suggests that the criterion is achievable also in balanced tournaments. However, we prove that it again becomes impossible to achieve when we add a weak condition guarding against the phenomenon of tournament dropout.
- Appleton, D. R. 1995. May the best man win? Statistician 44, 4, 529--538.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Fischer, F., Procaccia, A. D., and Samorodnitsky, A. 2009. A new perspective on implementation by voting trees. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC’09). ACM, New York, NY, 31--40. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Groh, C., Moldovanu, B., Sela, A., and Sunde, U. 2009. Optimal seedings in elimination tournaments. Economic Theory.Google Scholar
- Hazon, N., Dunne, P. E., Kraus, S., and Wooldridge, M. 2007. How to rig an election. In Proceedings of the 9th Bar-Ilan Symposium on the Foundations of Artificial Intelligence.Google Scholar
- Horen, J. and Riezman, R. 1985. Comparing draws for single elimination tournaments. Oper. Resear. 33, 2, 249--262.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hwang, F. K. 1982. New concepts in seeding knockout tournaments. Am. Math. Monthly 89, 4, 235--239.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kendall, G., Knust, S., Ribeiro, C. C., and Urrutia, S. 2010. Scheduling in sports: An annotated bibliography. Comput. Oper. Resear. 37, 1, 1--19. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Moon, J. W. and Pullman, N. J. 1970. On generalized tournament matrices. SIAM Rev. 12, 3, 384--399.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ryvkin, D. 2005. The predictive power of noisy elimination tournaments. Tech. rep., Economic Institute, Prague.Google Scholar
- Schwenk, A. J. 2000. What is the correct way to seed a knockout tournament? Am. Math. Monthly 107, 2, 140--150.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Vu, T. and Shoham, Y. 2010. Optimal seeding in knockout tournaments (extended abstract). In Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS’10). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Vu, T., Altman, A., and Shoham, Y. 2009. On the complexity of schedule control problems for knockout tournaments. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS’09). 225--232. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Fair Seeding in Knockout Tournaments
Recommendations
Neighborhood monotonicity, the extended Zermelo model, and symmetric knockout tournaments
In this paper, neighborhood monotonicity is presented as a natural property for methods of ranking generalized tournaments (directed graphs with weighted edges). An extension of Zermelo's classical method of ranking tournaments is shown to have this ...
Fixing knockout tournaments with seeds
AbstractKnockout tournaments constitute a popular format for organizing sports competitions. While prior results have shown that it is often possible to manipulate a knockout tournament by fixing the bracket, these results ignore the prevalent ...
On the 3-kings and 4-kings in multipartite tournaments
Koh and Tan gave a sufficient condition for a 3-partite tournament to have at least one 3-king in [K.M. Koh, B.P. Tan, Kings in multipartite tournaments, Discrete Math. 147 (1995) 171-183, Theorem 2]. In Theorem 1 of this paper, we extend this result to ...
Comments