<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-08-03T20:10:19Z</responseDate>
  <request identifier="1221" metadataPrefix="oai_dc" verb="GetRecord">https://drops.dagstuhl.de/oai</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <record>
      <header>
        <identifier>oai:drops-oai.dagstuhl.de:1221</identifier>
        <datestamp>2024-03-06T11:07:34Z</datestamp>
        <setSpec>ddc:004</setSpec>
        <setSpec>open_access</setSpec>
      </header>
      <metadata>
        <oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
          <dc:title>Divide-and-Conquer: A Proportional, Minimal-Envy Cake-Cutting Procedure</dc:title>
          <dc:creator>Brams, Steven J.</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Jones, Michael A.</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Klamler, Christian</dc:creator>
          <dc:subject>Cake-cutting</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>proportionality</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>envy-freeness</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>efficiency</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>strategy-proofness</dc:subject>
          <dc:description>Properties of discrete cake-cutting procedures that use a minimal number of cuts (n-1 if there are n players) are analyzed.  None is always envy-free or efficient, but divide-and-conquer (D&amp;C) minimizes the maximum number of players that any single player may envy.  It works by asking n ≥ 2 players successively to place marks on a cake that divide it into equal or approximately equal halves, then halves of these halves, and so on.  Among other properties, D&amp;C (i) ensures players of more than 1/n shares if their marks are different and (ii) is strategyproof for risk-averse players.  However, D&amp;C may not allow players to obtain proportional, connected pieces if they have unequal entitlements.  Possible applications of D&amp;C to land division are briefly discussed.</dc:description>
          <dc:publisher>Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik</dc:publisher>
          <dc:contributor>Steven J. Brams and Michael A. Jones and Christian Klamler</dc:contributor>
          <dc:date>2007</dc:date>
          <dc:relation>Is Part Of Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 7261, Fair Division (2007)</dc:relation>
          <dc:type>InProceedings</dc:type>
          <dc:type>Text</dc:type>
          <dc:type>doc-type:ResearchArticle</dc:type>
          <dc:type>publishedVersion</dc:type>
          <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
          <dc:identifier>doi:10.4230/DagSemProc.07261.6</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-12211</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/DagSemProc.07261.6</dc:identifier>
          <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
          <dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode</dc:rights>
        </oai_dc:dc>
      </metadata>
    </record>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
