Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/1324249.1324268acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagestarkConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Vote manipulation in the presence of multiple sincere ballots

Published: 25 June 2007 Publication History

Abstract

A classical result in voting theory, the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem, states that for any non-dictatorial voting rule for choosing between three or more candidates, there will be situations that give voters an incentive to manipulate by not reporting their true preferences. However, this theorem does not immediately apply to all voting rules that are used in practice. For instance, it makes the implicit assumption that there is a unique way of casting a sincere vote, for any given preference ordering over candidates. Approval voting is an important voting rule that does not satisfy this condition. In approval voting, a ballot consists of the names of any subset of the set of candidates standing; these are the candidates the voter approves of. The candidate receiving the most approvals wins. A ballot is considered sincere if the voter prefers any of the approved candidates over any of the disapproved candidates. In this paper, we explore to what extent the presence of multiple sincere ballots allows us to circumvent the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem. Our results show that there are several interesting settings in which no voter will have an incentive not to vote by means of some sincere ballot.

References

[1]
S. Barberà, W. Bossert, and P. Pattanaik. Ranking sets of objects. In Handbook of Utility Theory: Volume 2. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004.
[2]
S. J. Brams and P. C. Fishburn. Approval voting. American Political Science Review, 72(3):831--847, 1978.
[3]
V. Conitzer, J. Lang, and T. Sandholm. How many candidates are required to make an election hard to manipulate? In Proc. TARK-2003, 2003.
[4]
F. De Sinopoli, B. Dutta, and J.-F. Laslier. Approval votig: Three examples. International Journal of Game Theory, 35:27--38, 2006.
[5]
E. Elkind and H. Lipmaa. Hybrid voting protocols and hardness of manipulation. In Proc. 16th International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation (ISAAC-2005). Springer-Verlag, 2005.
[6]
A. Gibbard. Manipulation of voting schemes: A general result. Econometrica, 41(4):587--601, 1973.
[7]
R. G. Niemi. The problem of strategic behavior under approval voting. American Political Science Review, 78(4):952--958, 1984.
[8]
R. Parikh and E. Pacuit. Safe votes, sincere votes, and strategizing. Presented at the 16th International Conference on Game Theory at Stony Brook, 2005.
[9]
M. A. Satterthwaite. Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions. Journal of Economic Theory, 10:187--217, 1975.
[10]
L. J. Savage. The Foundations of Statistics. Dover Publications, 2nd edition, 1972.
[11]
A. D. Taylor. Social Choice and the Mathematics of Manipulation. Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Cited By

View all
  • (2020)Heuristic Strategies in Uncertain Approval Voting EnvironmentsProceedings of the 19th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3398761.3399052(1993-1995)Online publication date: 5-May-2020
  • (2019)A Multicriteria View About Judicial and Legislative Decision Making in Digital Cities and SocietiesSmart and Digital Cities10.1007/978-3-030-12255-3_13(209-220)Online publication date: 17-May-2019
  • (2011)Possible winners when new alternatives joinThe 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 210.5555/2031678.2031736(829-836)Online publication date: 2-May-2011
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
TARK '07: Proceedings of the 11th conference on Theoretical aspects of rationality and knowledge
June 2007
296 pages
ISBN:9781450378413
DOI:10.1145/1324249
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 25 June 2007

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Qualifiers

  • Article

Acceptance Rates

TARK '07 Paper Acceptance Rate 32 of 100 submissions, 32%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 61 of 177 submissions, 34%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)1
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 25 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2020)Heuristic Strategies in Uncertain Approval Voting EnvironmentsProceedings of the 19th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3398761.3399052(1993-1995)Online publication date: 5-May-2020
  • (2019)A Multicriteria View About Judicial and Legislative Decision Making in Digital Cities and SocietiesSmart and Digital Cities10.1007/978-3-030-12255-3_13(209-220)Online publication date: 17-May-2019
  • (2011)Possible winners when new alternatives joinThe 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 210.5555/2031678.2031736(829-836)Online publication date: 2-May-2011
  • (2009)Preference aggregation over restricted ballot languagesProceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence10.5555/1661445.1661466(122-127)Online publication date: 11-Jul-2009

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media