TALMUDIC BANKRUPTCY PROBLEM : SPECIAL AND GENERAL SOLUTIONS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
An elementary solution is presented to the special bankruptcy problem described in the Babylonian Talmud. The presented solution pertains to the numerical data presented in the Tractate of Kethuboth 93a. General solution for any combination of data is also given. Solution of the special case appears to be suitable for inclusion in courses on economy, as well as in group study environments. 1 Introduction Modern solutions of division problems are based, primarily on the idea of proportionality, advocated by Aristotle: just act necessarily involves at least four terms: two persons for whom it is in fact just, and two shares in which its justice is exhibited. And there will be the same equality between the shares as between the persons, because the shares will be in the same ratio to one another as the persons what is just in this sense, then, is what is proportional, and what is unjust is what violates the proportion. Oppenheim (17) interprets the Aristotelian approach as follows: Aristotle himself enlarged the criterion of egalitarianism to include rules which allot shares to equals; i.e. equal shares of some specified kind to all who are equal with respect to some specified characteristic. Conversely, a rule is inegalitarian when either equals are awarded unequal shares or unequals equal shares. However, is not necessarily synonymous with justice. Impressive examples of fair division which do not use proportionality in the usual setting are given in the Mishna (24, 25), a 1800-year old document that forms the basis for Jewish civil, criminal, and religious law. This paper deals with a division problem discussed in the Mishna, tractate Kethuboth (28). The particular allocations mentioned there, in the terminology of Aumann and Maschler (2) look mysterious; but whatever they may mean, they do not fit any obvious extension of either equal or proportional division. Over two millennia, this Mishna has spawned a large literature. Many authorities disagree with it outright. Others attribute the figures to special circumstances not made explicit in the A few have attempted direct rationalization of the figures as such, mostly with little success. One modern scholar, exasperated by his inability to make sense of the text, suggested errors in transcription. In brief, the passage is notoriously difficult. For this problem, which we have not yet introduced, Aumann and Maschler (2) provided an algorithm for solution in their breakthrough paper via the game-theoretic approach, utilizing the nucleolus concept. They presented, in their own words, three different justifications of the solution to the bankruptsy problem that the nucleolus prescribes in terms that are independent of each other and of game theory, and that were well within the reach of the sages of the Mishna. A remarkable fact is that the non-game-theoretic approaches were identified by Aumann and Maschler (2) after they had found the solution via game-theoretic analysis; again in their own words, only after realizing that the numbers in the Mishna correspond to the nucleolus did we find independent rationales. Without the 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 01A07 ethnomathematics, 91B mathematical economics, 97D education and instruction in mathematics.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».