Quantum voting and violation of Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem
نویسندگان
چکیده
Abstract We propose a quantum voting system in the spirit of quantum games such as the quantum Prisoner’s Dilemma. Our scheme violates a quantum analogue of Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem, which states that every (classical) constitution endowed with three innocuous-seeming properties is a dictatorship. Superpositions, interference, and entanglement of votes feature in voting tactics available to quantum voters but not to classical.
منابع مشابه
Approval voting and Arrow's impossibility theorem
Approval voting has attracted considerable interest among voting theorists, but they have rarely investigated it in the Arrovian framework of social welfare functions (SWF) and never connected it with Arrow’s impossibility theorem. This note explores these two directions. Assuming that voters have dichotomous preferences, it first characterizes approval voting in terms of its SWF properties and...
متن کاملClaude Hillinger: On the Possibility of Democracy and Rational Collective Choice
The paper challenges the ‘orthodox doctrine’ of collective choice theory according to which Arrow’s ‘general possibility theorem’ precludes rational decision procedures generally and implies that in particular all voting procedures must be flawed. I point out that all voting procedures are cardinal and that Arrow’s result, based on preference orderings cannot apply to them. All voting procedure...
متن کامل1 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 کاملAggregating Sets of Judgments: Two Impossibility Results Compared1
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 کاملArithmetic Social Choice: Arrow’s Theorem and Single Peaked Preference
We construct an algebraic model of the social choice theory. First we give an arithmetic proof of Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem. Next we apply our algebraic method to single-peaked preference domain to establish two theorems. (i) A value of Arrovian social welfare function on single peaked preference domain is single-plateaued with at most two maximal elements. (ii) An ordering by majority voti...
متن کامل