Annexations and Merging in Weighted Voting Games - The Extent of Susceptibility of Power Indices
نویسندگان
چکیده
This paper discusses weighted voting games and two methods of manipulating those games, called annexation and merging. These manipulations allow either an agent, called an annexer to take over the voting weights of some other agents in the game, or the coming together of some agents to form a bloc of manipulators to have more power over the outcomes of the games. We evaluate the extent of susceptibility to these manipulations in weighted voting games of the following prominent power indices: Shapley-Shubik, Banzhaf, and DeeganPackel indices. We found that for unanimity weighted voting games of n agents and for the three indices: the manipulability, (i.e., the extent of susceptibility to manipulation) via annexation of any one index does not dominate that of other indices, and the upper bound on the extent to which an annexer may gain while annexing other agents is at most n times the power of the agent in the original game. Experiments on non unanimity weighted voting games suggest that the three indices are highly susceptible to manipulation via annexation while they are less susceptible to manipulation via merging. In both annexation and merging, the ShapleyShubik index is the most susceptible to manipulation among the indices.
منابع مشابه
Manipulation of Weighted Voting Games and the Effect of Quota
The Shapley-Shubik, Banzhaf, and Deegan-Packel indices are three prominent power indices for measuring voters’ power in weighted voting games. We consider two methods of manipulating weighted voting games, called annexation and merging. These manipulations allow either an agent, called an annexer to take over the voting weights of some other agents, or the coming together of some agents to form...
متن کاملFalse Name Manipulations in Weighted Voting Games: Susceptibility of Power Indices
The splitting of weights into smaller sizes by agents in a weighted voting game and the distribution of the new weights among several false identities with the intent of payoff or power increase in a new game consisting of the original agents as well as the false identities is called false name manipulation. In this paper, we study false name manipulations in weighted voting games focusing on t...
متن کاملFalse-Name Manipulation in Weighted Voting Games Is Hard for Probabilistic Polynomial Time
False-name manipulation refers to the question of whether a player in a weighted voting game can increase her power by splitting into several players and distributing her weight among these false identities. Analogously to this splitting problem, the beneficial merging problem asks whether a coalition of players can increase their power in a weighted voting game by merging their weights. Aziz e...
متن کاملA Search-based Approach to Annexation and Merging in Weighted Voting Games
Weighted voting games are classic cooperative games which provide a compact representation for coalition formation models in multiagent systems. We consider manipulation in weighted voting games via annexation and merging, which involves an agent or some agents misrepresenting their identities in anticipation of gaining more power at the expense of other agents in a game. We show that annexatio...
متن کاملBounds on Manipulation by Merging in Weighted Voting Games
Manipulation by merging in weighted voting games (WVGs) is a voluntary action of would-be strategic agents who come together to form a bloc in anticipation of receiving more payoff over the outcomes of games. The inability to limit (or understand) the effects of this menace may undermine the confidence agents have in decisions made via WVGs. If the results are not seen as fair, agents may refus...
متن کامل