2003
DOI: 10.1016/s0165-4896(02)00087-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Consensus-halving via theorems of Borsuk-Ulam and Tucker

Abstract: In this paper we show how theorems of Borsuk-Ulam and Tucker can be used to construct a consensus-halving: a division of an object into two portions so that each of n people believes the portions are equal. Moreover, the division takes at most n cuts, which is best possible. This extends prior work using methods from combinatorial topology to solve fair division problems. Several applications of consensus-halving are discussed. 

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
78
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(78 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
78
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Interest in small triangulations of cubes stems principally from certain simplicial fixed-point algorithms (e.g., see [14]) which run faster when there are fewer simplices. The same considerations govern more recent fair division procedures [11], [13] …”
Section: Triangulations Of Cubesmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Interest in small triangulations of cubes stems principally from certain simplicial fixed-point algorithms (e.g., see [14]) which run faster when there are fewer simplices. The same considerations govern more recent fair division procedures [11], [13] …”
Section: Triangulations Of Cubesmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…This relation puts the complexity of finding a solution for regular instances in complexity classes different from the usual NP-hard or polynomial solvable problems. For PPW (2, k) there are constructions (see [13,20]) but not likely to be efficient, even though the corresponding decision problem is solvable. For PPW(c, k), c > 2 there is no constructive proof, even if of course a complete search of all possible cutting points leads always to one of the existing solutions.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our approach may provide new techniques for developing constructive proofs of Kneser's conjecture (e.g., see [8]), certain generalized Tucker lemmas (e.g., the Z p -Tucker lemma of Ziegler [13] or the generalized Tucker's lemma conjectured by Simmons-Su [9]), as well as provide new interpretations of algorithms that depend on Tucker's lemma (see [9] for applications to cake-cutting, Alon's necklace-splitting problem, team-splitting, and other fair division problems).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By constructive proof, we mean one that (i) shows the existence of the solution and (ii) locates it by a method other than an exhaustive search. This is the sense in which Freund-Todd [6] use the word constructive (this is called an effective procedure in [9]). The distinction from an exhaustive search is important for two reasons.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%