论图洛克诉讼中的排除原则

Bo Chen, Yi-Hsiu Tseng, Ajalavat Viriyavipart, Xuezhi Zhang
{"title":"论图洛克诉讼中的排除原则","authors":"Bo Chen, Yi-Hsiu Tseng, Ajalavat Viriyavipart, Xuezhi Zhang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3682662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In an influential paper, Fang (Public Choice 112: 351–371, 2002) asserts that the exclusion principle discovered by Baye et al. (1993) for all-pay auction does not apply to lottery in the case in which an organizer cares about the aggregate effort. Serena (2017) shows that the exclusion principle still applies to lottery with (sufficiently) homogeneous contestants if the organizer only cares about the effort of the winner. In this paper, we consider a Tullock lottery contest in which contestants' types are binary and stochastic and the two types are significantly different. We find that Fang's (2002) result still holds but Serena's (2017) result does not. Precisely, to increase the expected winner's effort, it is strictly beneficial to exclude all but two contestants if and only if each contestant's probability of being the weak type is small. If the probability is sufficiently high, it is optimal to include all contestants.","PeriodicalId":198334,"journal":{"name":"Labor: Personnel Economics eJournal","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Exclusion Principle in Tullock Contests\",\"authors\":\"Bo Chen, Yi-Hsiu Tseng, Ajalavat Viriyavipart, Xuezhi Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3682662\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In an influential paper, Fang (Public Choice 112: 351–371, 2002) asserts that the exclusion principle discovered by Baye et al. (1993) for all-pay auction does not apply to lottery in the case in which an organizer cares about the aggregate effort. Serena (2017) shows that the exclusion principle still applies to lottery with (sufficiently) homogeneous contestants if the organizer only cares about the effort of the winner. In this paper, we consider a Tullock lottery contest in which contestants' types are binary and stochastic and the two types are significantly different. We find that Fang's (2002) result still holds but Serena's (2017) result does not. Precisely, to increase the expected winner's effort, it is strictly beneficial to exclude all but two contestants if and only if each contestant's probability of being the weak type is small. If the probability is sufficiently high, it is optimal to include all contestants.\",\"PeriodicalId\":198334,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Labor: Personnel Economics eJournal\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Labor: Personnel Economics eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3682662\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Labor: Personnel Economics eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3682662","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Fang (Public Choice 112: 351-371, 2002)在一篇有影响力的论文中断言,在组织者关心总努力的情况下,Baye等人(1993)在全付费拍卖中发现的排除原则不适用于彩票。Serena(2017)表明,如果组织者只关心中奖者的努力,排除原则仍然适用于具有(足够)同质参赛者的彩票。本文考虑了一种具有二元和随机两种类型且两种类型显著不同的塔洛克彩票竞赛。我们发现Fang(2002)的结果仍然成立,而Serena(2017)的结果则不成立。确切地说,为了增加预期赢家的努力,当且仅当每个参赛者成为弱类型的概率很小时,排除除两个参赛者以外的所有参赛者是严格有益的。如果概率足够高,最优方案是包括所有参赛者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On the Exclusion Principle in Tullock Contests
In an influential paper, Fang (Public Choice 112: 351–371, 2002) asserts that the exclusion principle discovered by Baye et al. (1993) for all-pay auction does not apply to lottery in the case in which an organizer cares about the aggregate effort. Serena (2017) shows that the exclusion principle still applies to lottery with (sufficiently) homogeneous contestants if the organizer only cares about the effort of the winner. In this paper, we consider a Tullock lottery contest in which contestants' types are binary and stochastic and the two types are significantly different. We find that Fang's (2002) result still holds but Serena's (2017) result does not. Precisely, to increase the expected winner's effort, it is strictly beneficial to exclude all but two contestants if and only if each contestant's probability of being the weak type is small. If the probability is sufficiently high, it is optimal to include all contestants.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信