First-Order Logic Formalisation of Impossibility Theorems in Preference Aggregation

نویسندگان

  • Umberto Grandi
  • Ulrich Endriss
چکیده

In preference aggregation a set of individuals express preferences over a set of alternatives, and these preferences have to be aggregated into a collective preference. When preferences are represented as orders, aggregation procedures are called social welfare functions. Classical results in social choice theory state that it is impossible to aggregate the preferences of a set of individuals under different natural sets of axiomatic conditions. We define a first-order language for social welfare functions and we give a complete axiomatisation for this class, without having the number of individuals or alternatives specified in the language. We are able to express classical axiomatic requirements in our first-order language, giving formal axioms for three classical theorems of preference aggregation by Arrow, by Sen, and by Kirman and Sondermann. We explore to what extent such theorems can be formally derived from our axiomatisations, obtaining positive results for Sen’s Theorem and the KirmanSondermann Theorem. For the case of Arrow’s Theorem, which does not apply in the case of infinite societies, we have to resort to fixing the number of individuals with an additional axiom. In the long run, we hope that our approach to formalisation can serve as the basis for a fully automated proof of classical and new theorems in social choice theory.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Automated Search for Impossibility Theorems in Social Choice Theory: Ranking Sets of Objects

We present a method for using standard techniques from satisfiability checking to automatically verify and discover theorems in an area of economic theory known as ranking sets of objects. The key question in this area, which has important applications in social choice theory and decision making under uncertainty, is how to extend an agent’s preferences over a number of objects to a preference ...

متن کامل

A Syntactic Proof of Arrow's Theorem in a Modal Logic of Social Choice Functions

We show how to formalise Arrow’s Theorem on the impossibility of devising a method for preference aggregation that is both independent of irrelevant alternatives and Pareto efficient by using a modal logic of social choice functions. We also provide a syntactic proof of the theorem in that logic. While prior work has been successful in applying tools from logic and automated reasoning to social...

متن کامل

Arrow theorems in the fuzzy setting

Throughout this paper, our  main idea is to analyze the Arrovian approach in a fuzzy context, paying attention to different extensions of the classical Arrow's model arising in mathematical Social Choice to aggregate preferences that the agents define on a set of alternatives. There is a wide set of extensions. Some of them give rise to an impossibility theorem as in the Arrovian classical  mod...

متن کامل

Judgment Aggregation

Judgment aggregation theory generalizes social choice theory by having the aggregation rule bear on judgments of all kinds instead of barely judgments of preference. The paper briefly sums it up, privileging the variant that formalizes judgment by a logical syntax. The theory derives from Kornhauser and Sager’s doctrinal paradox and Pettit’s discursive dilemma, which List and Pettit turned into...

متن کامل

1 Aggregating Sets of Judgments : Two Impossibility Results Compared 1 forthcoming in

The “doctrinal paradox” or “discursive dilemma” shows that propositionwise majority voting over the judgments held by multiple individuals on some interconnected propositions can lead to inconsistent collective judgments on these propositions. List and Pettit (2002) have proved that this paradox illustrates a more general impossibility theorem showing that there exists no aggregation procedure ...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • J. Philosophical Logic

دوره 42  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2013