2018
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-00202-2_12
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Axiomatisation of the Banzhaf Value and Interaction Index for Multichoice Games

Abstract: We provide an axiomatisation of the Banzhaf value (or power index) and the Banzhaf interaction index for multichoice games, which are a generalisation of cooperative games with several levels of participation. Multichoice games can model any aggregation model in multicriteria decision making, provided the attributes take a finite number of values. Our axiomatisation uses standard axioms of the Banzhaf value for classical games (linearity, null axiom, symmetry), an invariance axiom specific to the multichoice c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(26 reference statements)
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Why not additivity and efficiency? Actually, we do not expect the Variational Values to satisfy the additivity and efficiency axioms due to the following reasons: 1) Similar as what Ridaoui et al (2018) argues, efficiency and additivity do not make sense for certain games. Let us consider feature valuation in the simple classification problem, which can be viewed as a voting game (N, F(S)): each feature participates in the coalition in order to vote for the classification result to be true or false.…”
Section: Axiomatisation Of Variational Valuesmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Why not additivity and efficiency? Actually, we do not expect the Variational Values to satisfy the additivity and efficiency axioms due to the following reasons: 1) Similar as what Ridaoui et al (2018) argues, efficiency and additivity do not make sense for certain games. Let us consider feature valuation in the simple classification problem, which can be viewed as a voting game (N, F(S)): each feature participates in the coalition in order to vote for the classification result to be true or false.…”
Section: Axiomatisation Of Variational Valuesmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…To ensure the fairness of data valuation functions, a common approach in CGT is axiomatization, where a list of axioms is provided to be fulfilled by data valuation functions. There are four important axioms that are commonly agreed to be fair (Covert, Lundberg, and Lee 2021;Ridaoui, Grabisch, and Labreuche 2018;Sim, Xu, and Low 2022): Linearity, Dummy Player, Interchangeability and Monotonicity (refer to App. A for their respective definition and connection to fairness).…”
Section: Semivalue-based Data Valuationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This mandates model owners to delete the data and their impact from trained models without undue delay (Magdziarczyk 2019) upon request or after a stipulated time (Ong 2018). While these regulations have led to intensive research on machine unlearning (Bourtoule et al 2021;Chen et al 2021;Sekhari et al 2021) to efficiently remove the impact of deleted data from trained models, to our knowledge, no work has considered the impact of data deletions on data valuation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When the symmetry axiom is removed, the quasivalue and the weighted value have been studied (Shapley, 1953a;Banzhaf III, 1964;Gilboa and Monderer, 1991;Monderer et al, 1992). When the efficiency axiom is removed, the semivalue has been studied (Dubey and Weber, 1977;Dubey et al, 1981;Ridaoui et al, 2018). We refer to Monderer and Samet (2002b) for a complementary literature review of variations of Shapley value.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%