Wednesday, October 18, 2017

Remembering Howard Raiffa

The Negotiation Journal has published some memories of Howard Raiffa, who passed away in July of last year. Here's my contribution:


Some Memories of My Academic Grandfather

Authors

I first met Howard shortly after I received my Ph.D. from Stanford University in 1974. Robert B. Wilson, my advisor, had been Howard's student, and so Howard was my academic grandfather. I visited Howard in his office at Harvard Business School and talked with him about my dissertation. I had worked on a generalization of what were called von Neumann-Morgenstern solutions, which were sets of game outcomes, characterized by two properties, internal and external stability. As I recall the discussion, Howard said something like this to me: “If you want to generalize solutions, you have to give up one of those two properties. Which one did you give up?” When I told him I had relaxed the requirement of external stability, he paused and then said, “That's a lot to give up!” I recall thinking that my introduction to Howard had gotten off to a poor start.
I did not see Howard often after that until 1998, when my wife, Emilie, and I moved to Brookline, Massachusetts. We invited Howard and his wife, Estelle, to our Passover Seder, and they were among the last guests to arrive. They explained that they had driven from their home in Belmont to ours in Brookline, seen a line of cars parked outside a house similar to the one we had described, and had gone in and mingled. Only when that family took their seats for the Seder did they discover that they were at the wrong house. And indeed, they knew many more of the guests at our Seder. They became regulars at our Seder until they started spending more time in Arizona.
A distinguished line of academic descendants have followed Howard's lead in seeking what motivates practical behavior. These include Bob Wilson's students Paul Milgrom and Bengt Holmstrom, and a growing number of their students and mine as well. The thriving fields of experimental and behavioral economics and market design testify to Howard's legacy.
*************
Here is the table of contents of the special issue


  1. Special Issue: Celebrating Howard Raiffa's Legacy
    James K. Sebenius and Max H. Bazerman
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12209
  2. Prescriptions Based on a Realistic View of Human Behavior (pages 309–315)
    Max H. Bazerman
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12189
  3. Conflict Resolution by the Numbers (pages 317–322)
    Carrie Menkel-Meadow
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12190
  4. Balancing Analysis and Intuition (pages 323–327)
    Lawrence Susskind
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12191
  5. Howard Raiffa and Our Responsibility to Rationality (pages 329–332)
    Richard Zeckhauser
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12192
  6. A Short Course from Howard Raiffa (pages 333–335)
    Deborah M. Kolb
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12193
  7. Counting and Caring (pages 337–339)
    Lawrence H. Summers
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12194
  8. Mr. Positive Sum (pages 355–357)
    William Ury
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12198
  9. Tales of a True Mensch (pages 351–354)
    Robert H. Mnookin
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12197
  10. Howard Raiffa: Scholar, Leader, Teacher, Mentor, Friend (pages 359–362)
    Ralph L. Keeney
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12199
  11. Wisdom in Simplicity (pages 363–365)
    Jared R. Curhan
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12200
  12. Bridging Data, Decisions, and Negotiations (pages 367–370)
    Michael Wheeler
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12201
  13. Life Is Not Binary (pages 371–372)
    Mary Rowe
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12202
  14. Some Memories of My Academic Grandfather (pages 373–374)
    Alvin E. Roth
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12203
  15. Asking the Right Questions (pages 375–378)
    Susan G. Hackley
    Version of Record online: 18 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/nejo.12204

Chronologically incompatible patient-donor pairs: more on vouchers for future transplants

 Here's the published version of a paper I've blogged about before, followed by a comment, in the September issue of the journal Transplantation.

Vouchers for Future Kidney Transplants to Overcome “Chronological Incompatibility” Between Living Donors and Recipients
Veale, Jeffrey L.; Capron, Alexander M.' Nassiri, Nima; Danovitch, Gabriel; Gritsch, H. Albin; Waterman, Amy; Del Pizzo, Joseph; Hu, Jim C.; Pycia, Marek; McGuire, Suzanne; Charlton, Marian; Kapur, Sandip
Transplantation: September 2017 - Volume 101 - Issue 9 - p 2115–2119

"The donation of a kidney at a time that is optimal for the donor generates a “voucher” that only a specified recipient may redeem later when needed. The voucher provides the recipient with priority in being matched with a living donor from the end of a future transplantation chain."



Paying It Forward: Live Kidney Donation Now to (POSSIBLY) Benefit a Long-term Future Recipient
Sellers, Marty T. , Transplantation: September 2017 - Volume 101 - Issue 9 - p 1965–1966

"As intriguing as this extension of the National Kidney Registry’s Advanced Donation Program is, thoughtful questions emerge. It is unclear how 2 or more voucher holders would be prioritized with respect to one another as chain-ending recipients if each could end a future chain. The authors offer 2 possible factors to consider (highest panel reactive antibody, length of time holding a voucher), and both are arguably not individually or collectively sufficient. Should the number of transplants facilitated by the original donation(s) also be considered? This could (perhaps unfairly) advantage the recipient who held multiple vouchers—for example, the voucher holder in cases 2 and 3 in the article—and would incentivize more donors. Should HLA matching be an overriding factor? Should life-years from transplant matter? Time on dialysis? How about length of the future chain? The authors do note the current framework might not address all future situations; if the program becomes widely adopted, these potential situations become more likely and deserve proper forethought. "

Tuesday, October 17, 2017

Funding for dissertations that combine economics and computer science

The SIGecom Doctoral Dissertation Award recognizes an outstanding dissertation in the field of economics and computer science. The award is conferred annually at the ACM Conference on Economics and Computation and includes a plaque, complimentary conference registration, and an honorarium of $1,500. A plaque may further be given to up to two runners-up. No award may be conferred if the nominations are judged not to meet the standards for the award.

To be eligible, a dissertation must be on a topic related to the field of economics and computer science and must have been defended successfully during the calendar year preceding the year of the award presentation.

The next SIGecom Doctoral Dissertation Award will be given for dissertations defended in 2017. Nominations are due by the March 31, 2018, and must be submitted by email with the subject "SIGecom Doctoral Dissertation Award" to the awards committee at sigecom-awards-diss@acm.org. A dissertation may be nominated simultaneously for both the SIGecom Doctoral Dissertation Award and the ACM Doctoral Dissertation Award.

Nominations may be made by any member of SIGecom, and will typically come from the dissertation supervisor. Self-nomination is not allowed. Nominations for the award must include the following, preferably in a single PDF file:

1. A two-page summary of the dissertation, written by the nominee, including bibliographic data and links to publicly accessible versions of published papers based primarily on the dissertation.
2. An English-language version of the dissertation.
3. An endorsement letter of no more than two pages by the nominator, arguing the merit of the dissertation, potential impact, and justification of the nomination. This document should also certify the dissertation defense date.
4. The names, email addresses, and affiliations of at least two additional endorsers.

The additional endorsement letters themselves should be emailed directly to sigecom-awards-diss@acm.org, by the same deadline. These endorsements should be no longer than 500 words, and should specify the relationship of the endorser to the nominee, contributions of the dissertation, and its potential impact on the field.

It is expected that a nominated candidate, if selected for the award, will attend the next ACM Conference on Economics and Computation to accept the award and give a presentation on the dissertation work. The cost of attending the conference is not covered by the award, but complimentary registration is provided.

·  Award Committee

  • Nicole Immorlica, Microsoft Research New England
  • Ariel Procaccia, Carnegie Mellow University
  • Aaron Roth, University of Pennsylvania

Monday, October 16, 2017

Kenneth Arrow Tribute

Here is a sequence of video memories of Ken Arrow, about three minutes each. (I'm at minute 57...)



And here's a news release with a picture and some links:
A Nobel moment in memory of the late Kenneth Arrow

Sunday, October 15, 2017

Black markets and violence: Chimeli and Soares on mahogany

Black markets and violence go together like lawlessness and silence...

 The Use of Violence in Illegal Markets: Evidence from Mahogany Trade in the Brazilian Amazon  By Ariaster B. Chimeli and Rodrigo R. Soares
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 2017, 9(4): 30–57 https://doi.org/10.1257/app.20160055 30

Here's the abstract:
"We provide evidence on the effect of market illegality on violence. Brazil was historically the main exporter of mahogany. Starting in the 1990s, trade was restricted and eventually prohibited. We build on previous evidence that mahogany trade persisted after prohibition and document relative increases in violence in areas with natural occurrence of mahogany. We show that as illegal activity receded in the late 2000s so did the relative increase in violence. We describe an experience of increase in violence following the transition of a market from legal to illegal and contribute to the evaluation of prohibition policies under limited enforcement."

And here are the two concluding paragraphs:
"Different markets are embedded in different institutional settings and the relationship between illegality and violence is likely to vary across contexts. For example, corruption and high monitoring costs may make it difficult to enforce the prohibition of narcotics, whereas the existence of low cost substitutes for chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) may have contributed to the largely successful—although not perfect— worldwide ban on the substance. With these caveats in mind, our analysis provides
one piece of evidence pointing to a causal effect of market illegality, per se, on the incidence of systemic violence and exemplifies how enforcement capacity interferes in this relationship.

"Our results also serve as a cautionary tale for policymakers wishing to regulate markets associated with perceived negative externalities. Consider US Executive Order 12866 of 1993 stating that “each agency shall assess both the costs and the benefits of the intended regulation and, recognizing that some costs and benefits are difficult to quantify, propose, or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs.” Violence is an important social cost to be accounted for in the cost-benefit analysis of market control policies. In the absence of adequate enforcement capabilities, addressing unwanted externalities with overly restrictive regulations may end up exacerbating social losses."

Saturday, October 14, 2017

Definition of success? Short video trailers from Brazil

Here is a link to a 3 minute trailer from a forthcoming video in which various people (including me) were asked for definitions of success...

Você vai ser bem-sucedido? Veja no maior documentário brasileiro sobre prosperidade  (Are you going to be successful? See the largest Brazilian documentary on prosperity)

And here's 50 seconds, all in English (with subtitles in Portuguese), on scarcity.

Friday, October 13, 2017

Summary of the Israeli Medical Internship Match


Slava Bronfman, Avinatan Hassidim, Gideon Kalif, and Assaf Romm (2017), Matching practices for entry-labor markets – The Israeli Medical Internship Match, MiP Country Profile 25.”


Summary box


What is allocated?Medical internships.
Who are the participants?Graduates of medical schools.
Stated objectives of matching policyFairness among doctors, equal spread of talent across the country.
Who’s in charge?The Ministry of Health and a committee elected by the student body.
In place since2014
Available capacitySame as the number of doctors (≈500 local grads + ~200 foreign grads).
Timing of enrolmentMay of every year.
Information available to applicants prior to enrolment periodDescription and code of the mechanism, summary statistics of previous years.
Restrictions on preference expressionStudents must rank all hospitals.
Matching procedureVariant of competitive equilibrium with equal incomes (CEEI).
Priorities and quotasProportional to hospitals’ size, and extra for periphery.
Further special featureCouples are to the same hospital.
Bronfman, S., Alon, N., Hassidim, A., and Romm, A.,2015. Redesigning the Israeli Medical Internship Match. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, 753-754.

 Bronfman, S., Hassidim, A., Afek, A., Romm, A., Shreberk, R., Hassidim, A. and Massler, A., 2015. Assigning Israeli medical graduates to internships. Israel journal of health policy research, 4(1).