The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A GENERIC APPROACH TO COALITION FORMATION
Open accessAbstract
We propose an abstract approach to coalition formation that focuses on simple merge and split rules transforming partitions of a group of players. We identify conditions under which every iteration of these rules yields a unique partition. The main conceptual tool is a specific notion of a stable partition. The results are parametrized by a preference relation between partitions of a group of players and naturally apply to coalitional TU-games, hedonic games and exchange economy games.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Axioms of Cooperative Decision Making
Moulin, H. (1988) · doi:10.1017/ccol0521360552 · Cited by 1,279
Myles, G. D. (1993) · European Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1016/0176-2680(93)90012-j · Cited by 875
Cited by
Coalitional game theory for communication networks
Saad, W., Han, Z., Debbah, M., Hjorungnes, A., & Basar, T. (2009) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/msp.2009.000000 · Cited by 1,051
Metadata
- Authors
- APT, K. R., & WITZEL, A.
- Venue
- International Game Theory Review
- Publisher
- World Scientific Pub Co Pte Lt
- Published
- 2009-09
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 03
- Pages
- 347-367
- ISSN
- 0219-1989 (ISSN-L)
- 1793-6675
- OpenAlex
- W2090939903
- Cited by
- 325
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 46.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A GENERIC APPROACH TO COALITION FORMATION. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1142/s0219198909002352
- The paper
- APT, K. R., & WITZEL, A. (2009). A GENERIC APPROACH TO COALITION FORMATION. International Game Theory Review. https://doi.org/10.1142/s0219198909002352
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
