Sequential Voting and Agenda Manipulation: The Case of Forward Looking Tie-Breaking
نویسندگان
چکیده
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 characterizations of the attainable outcomes for arbitrary quotas allow us to compare the possibilities for manipulation across different quotas. It turns out that the simple majority quota maximizes the domain of preference profiles for which neither procedure is manipulable, but at the same time neither the simple majority quota nor any other quota uniformly minimize the scope of manipulation, once this becomes possible. Hence, quite surprisingly, simple majority voting is not necessarily the optimal choice of a society that is concerned about agenda manipulation.
منابع مشابه
Sequential 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 کاملOn Coalitional Manipulation for Multiwinner Elections: Shortlisting
Shortlisting of candidates—selecting a group of “best” candidates—is a special case of multiwinner elections. We provide the first in-depth study of the computational complexity of strategic voting for shortlisting based on the most natural and simple voting rule in this scenario, `-Bloc (every voter approves ` candidates). In particular, we investigate the influence of several tie-breaking mec...
متن کاملOn manipulation in multi-winner elections based on scoring rules
Multi-winner elections model scenarios where voters must select a fixed-size group of candidates based on their individual preferences. In such scenarios, it is often the case that voters are incentivized to manipulate, i.e. misreport their preferences in order to obtain a better outcome. In this paper, we study the complexity of manipulating multiwinner elections under scoring rules, with a pa...
متن کاملTies Matter: Complexity of Manipulation when Tie-Breaking with a Random Vote
We study the impact on strategic voting of tie-breaking by means of considering the order of tied candidates within a random vote. We compare this to another non-deterministic tie-breaking rule where we simply choose candidate uniformly at random. In general, we demonstrate that there is no connection between the computational complexity of computing a manipulating vote with the two different t...
متن کاملOn the Complexity of Voting Manipulation under Randomized Tie-Breaking
Computational complexity of voting manipulation is one of the most actively studied topics in the area of computational social choice, starting with the groundbreaking work of [Bartholdi et al., 1989]. Most of the existing work in this area, including that of [Bartholdi et al., 1989], implicitly assumes that whenever several candidates receive the top score with respect to the given voting rule...
متن کامل