On the alternating use of unanimity and surjectivity in the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem
dc.authorid | Dogan, Emre/0000-0003-1672-5009 | |
dc.authorwosid | Sanver, M. Remzi/G-2339-2019 | |
dc.authorwosid | Dogan, Emre/L-9465-2015 | |
dc.contributor.author | Dogan, Emre | |
dc.contributor.author | Sanver, M. Remzi | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-07-18T20:42:32Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-07-18T20:42:32Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2007 | |
dc.department | İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | Surjectivity and unanimity can be equivalently used to state the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem. On the other hand, over restricted domains, replacing surjectivity with unanimity makes a stronger statement. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.econlet.2006.12.022 | |
dc.identifier.endpage | 143 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0165-1765 | |
dc.identifier.issue | 1 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-34249699699 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusquality | Q2 | en_US |
dc.identifier.startpage | 140 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2006.12.022 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/11411/7324 | |
dc.identifier.volume | 96 | en_US |
dc.identifier.wos | WOS:000247756700022 | en_US |
dc.identifier.wosquality | Q4 | en_US |
dc.indekslendigikaynak | Web of Science | en_US |
dc.indekslendigikaynak | Scopus | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | Elsevier Science Sa | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | Economics Letters | en_US |
dc.relation.publicationcategory | Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı | en_US |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess | en_US |
dc.subject | Strategy-Prooffiess | en_US |
dc.subject | Manipulation | en_US |
dc.subject | Unanimity | en_US |
dc.subject | Surjectivity | en_US |
dc.subject | Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem | en_US |
dc.title | On the alternating use of unanimity and surjectivity in the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |