Sharing Rewards Among Strangers Based on Peer Evaluations

References

• Bernardo JM, Smith AFM. Bayesian Theory (1994) (John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brams SJ, Taylor AD. Fair Division: From Cake-Cutting to Dispute Resolution (1996) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carvalho A, Larson K. A truth serum for sharing rewards. Proc. 10th Internat. Conf. Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2011) (International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Richland, SC) 635–642Google Scholar
• Chevaleyre Y, Dunne PE, Endriss U, Lang J, Lemaître M, Maudet N, Padget J, Phelps S, Rodríguez-Aguilar JA, Sousa P. Issues in multiagent resource allocation. Informatica (2006) 30:3–31Google Scholar
• Conitzer V, Sandholm T. Complexity of constructing solutions in the core based on synergies among coalitions. Artificial Intelligence (2006) 170(6):607–619Crossref, Google Scholar
• de Clippel G, Moulin H, Tideman N. Impartial division of a dollar. J. Econom. Theory (2008) 139(1):176–191Crossref, Google Scholar
• Epstein ES. A scoring system for probability forecasts of ranked categories. J. Appl. Meteorology (1969) 8(6):985–987Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gneiting T, Raftery AE. Strictly proper scoring rules, prediction, and estimation. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. (2007) 102(477):359–378Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goel S, Reeves DM, Pennock DM. Collective revelation: A mechanism for self-verified, weighted, and truthful predictions. Proc. 10th ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce (2009) (Association for Computing Machinery, New York) 265–274Crossref, Google Scholar
• Golany B, Kress M, Penn M, Rothblum UG. Network optimization models for resource allocation in developing military countermeasures. Oper. Res. (2012) 60(1):48–63Link, Google Scholar
• Griffin S, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Decision analysis for resource allocation in health care. J. Health Services Res. Policy (2008) 13(3):23–30Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grosz BJ, Kraus S. Collaborative plans for complex group action. Artificial Intelligence (1996) 86(2):269–357Crossref, Google Scholar
• Halpern JY. Beyond Nash equilibrium: Solution concepts for the 21st century. Proc. Twenty-Seventh ACM Sympos. Principles of Distributed Comput. (2008) (Association for Computing Machinery, New York) 1–10Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jurca R, Faltings B. Mechanisms for making crowds truthful. J. Artificial Intelligence Res. (2009) 34:209–253Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaufman DB, Felder RM, Fuller H. Accounting for individual effort in cooperative learning teams. J. Engrg. Ed. (2000) 89(2):133–140Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keller LR, Wang Y, Feng T, Cochran JJ, Cox LA, Keskinocak P, Kharoufeh JP, Smith JC. Fairness and equity in societal decision analysis. Wiley Encyclopedia of Operations Research and Management Science (2010) (John Wiley & Sons, New York) Google Scholar
• Kilgour DM, Gerchak Y. Elicitation of probabilities using competitive scoring rules. Decision Anal. (2004) 1(2):108–113Link, Google Scholar
• Knoblauch V. Three-agent peer evaluation. Econom. Lett. (2009) 105(3):312–314Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mas-Colell A, Whinston MD, Green JR. Microeconomic Theory (1995) (Oxford University Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Miller N, Resnick P, Zeckhauser R. Eliciting informative feedback: The peer-prediction method. Management Sci. (2005) 51(9):1359–1373Link, Google Scholar
• Moulin H. Incremental cost sharing: Characterization by coalition strategy-proofness. Soc. Choice Welfare (1999) 16(2):279–320Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moulin H. Fair Division and Collective Welfare (2004) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Moulin H, Shenker S. Strategyproof sharing of submodular costs: Budget balance versus efficiency. Econom. Theory (2001) 18(3):511–533Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murphy AH. A note on the ranked probability score. J. Appl. Meteorology (1970) 10(1):155–156Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nash JF. The bargaining problem. Econometrica (1950) 18(2):155–162Crossref, Google Scholar
• Osborne MJ, Rubinstein A. A Course in Game Theory (1994) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Pratt JW, Zeckhauser RJ. The fair and efficient division of the Winsor family silver. Management Sci. (1990) 36(11):1293–1301Link, Google Scholar
• Prelec D. A Bayesian truth serum for subjective data. Science (2004) 306(5695):462–466Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rahwan T, Ramchurn SD, Jennings NR, Giovannucci A. An anytime algorithm for optimal coalition structure generation. J. Artificial Intelligence Res. (2009) 34(1):521–567Crossref, Google Scholar
• Robertson J, Webb W. Cake-Cutting Algorithms: Be Fair If You Can (1998) (A.K. Peters, Natick, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Savage LJ. Elicitation of personal probabilities and expectations. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. (1971) 66(336):783–801Crossref, Google Scholar
• Selten R. Axiomatic characterization of the quadratic scoring rule. Experiment. Econom. (1998) 1(1):43–61Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shapley LS, Kuhn HW, Tucker AW. A value for N-person games. Contributions to the Theory of Games (1953) 2(Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) 307–317Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shoham Y, Leyton-Brown K. Multiagent Systems: Algorithmic, Game-Theoretic, and Logical Foundations (2009) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Staël von Holstein C-AS. A family of strictly proper scoring rules which are sensitive to distance. J. Appl. Meteorology (1970) 9(3):360–364Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stone P, Kaminka G, Kraus S, Rosenschein JS. Ad hoc autonomous agent teams: Collaboration without pre-coordination. Proc. Twenty-Fourth Conf. Artificial Intelligence (2010) (Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, Palo Alto, CA) 1504–1509Google Scholar
• Tideman TN, Plassmann F. Paying the partners. Public Choice (2008) 136(1):19–37Crossref, Google Scholar
• Witkowski J, Parkes DC. Peer prediction with private beliefs. Proc. Workshop Soc. Comput. User Generated Content (2011) San Jose, CAGoogle Scholar