Sequential Majority Voting with Incomplete Profiles
نویسندگان
چکیده
In sequential majority voting, preferences are aggregated by a sequence of pairwise comparisons (also called an agenda) between candidates. The result of each comparison is determined by a weighted majority vote between the agents. In this paper we consider the situation where the agents may not have revealed all their preferences. This is common in reallife settings, due to privacy issues or an ongoing elicitation process. We study the computational complexity of determining the winner(s), given that some preferences may not yet be revealed and the agenda is not yet known or decided. We show that it is easy to determine if a candidate must win whatever the agenda. On the other hand, it is hard to know whether a candidate can win in at least one agenda for at least one completion of unrevealed preferences. This is also true if the agenda is balanced (that is, each candidate must win the same number of pairwise competitions to win overall).
منابع مشابه
Determining winners in weighted sequential majority voting: incomplete profiles vs. majority graphs
In sequential majority voting, preferences are aggregated by a sequence of pairwise comparisons (also called an agenda) between candidates. The result of each comparison is determined by a weighted majority vote between the agents. In this paper we consider the situation where the agents may not have revealed all their preferences. This is common in real-life settings, due to privacy issues or ...
متن کاملSequential Voting and Agenda Manipulation: The Case of Forward Looking Tie-Breaking
We study the possibilities for agenda manipulation under strategic voting for two prominent sequential voting procedures, the amendment and the successive procedure. We show that a well-known result for tournaments, namely that the successive procedure is (weakly) more manipulable than the amendment procedure at any given preference profile, extends to arbitrary majority quotas. Moreover, our c...
متن کاملSequential voting and agenda manipulation
We study the possibilities for agenda manipulation under strategic voting for two prominent sequential voting procedures: the amendment procedure and the successive procedure. We show that a well known result for tournaments, namely that the successive procedure is (weakly) more manipulable than the amendment procedure at any given preference profile, extends to arbitrary majority quotas. Moreo...
متن کاملIncomplete Preferences in Single-Peaked Electorates
Incomplete preferences are likely to arise in realworld preference aggregation and voting systems. This paper deals with determining whether an incomplete preference profile is single-peaked. This is essential information since many intractable voting problems become tractable for single-peaked profiles. We prove that for incomplete profiles the problem of determining single-peakedness is NPcom...
متن کاملDealing with Incomplete Agents' Preferences and an Uncertain Agenda in Group Decision Making via Sequential Majority Voting
We consider multi-agent systems where agents’ preferences are aggregated via sequential majority voting: each decision is taken by performing a sequence of pairwise comparisons where each comparison is a weighted majority vote among the agents. Incompleteness in the agents’ preferences is common in many real-life settings due to privacy issues or an ongoing elicitation process. In addition, the...
متن کامل