arXiv++ Combinatorics

This theoretical note studies the finite axiomatizability of strict majority reasoning in finite social decision frames. Moss and Pedersen (2026) <doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2606.23853> introduce a coherence criterion that characterizes exactly when qualitative majority judgments are representable by a finitely additive measure. The question addressed here is whether that coherence criterion can be replaced, in the finite setting, by any bounded finite fragment. We prove that it cannot. For every $k\ge 1$, we construct a maximal standard frame whose shortest coherence violation has length exactly $2k+2$. Hence there is no uniform finite bound on the incoherence index of social decision frames, resolving Conjecture 5.7 stated by Moss and Pedersen (2026). The construction is geometric, in the sense that it proceeds via orthogonality and dimension in rational vector spaces, and self-contained: it isolates a symmetric family of half-sized voting blocs and extends it to a maximal frame in which every shorter balanced obstruction is excluded. Along the explicit infinite sequence of universe sizes obtained in the construction, this also establishes the middle-layer family predicted by Conjecture B.25 by Moss and Pedersen (2026). Together with the soundness and completeness theorem for the Moss-Pedersen minimal logic for strict majorities, this establishes that measurable social decision frames are not finitely axiomatizable in that language.

For networks with externalities, where each component's worth may depend on the full network structure, balanced contributions and fairness lead to distinct component-efficient allocation rules. We characterize the unique component-efficient allocation rule satisfying balanced contributions -- the BCE rule. Existence is the main challenge: balanced contributions must hold on every edge, but the construction uses only spanning-tree edges. A cycle-sum identity bridges this gap by reducing balanced contributions on non-tree edges to relations in proper subnetworks. The BCE rule coincides with the Myerson value for TU games and with its generalization by Jackson--Wolinsky for network games without externalities, it recovers the externality-free value on the complete network, and -- unlike the fairness-based FCE rule -- it does not reduce to a graph-free formula applied to the graph-restricted game.

We characterize the identified sets of a wide range of stochastic choice models, including random utility, various models of boundedly-rational behavior, and dynamic discrete choice. In each of these settings, we show two distributions over choice rules are observationally equivalent if and only if they can be obtained from one another via a finite sequence of simple swapping transforms. We leverage this to obtain complete descriptions of both the defining inequalities and extreme points of these identified sets. In cases where choice frequencies vary smoothly with some parameters, we provide a novel global-inverse result for practically testing identification.