Gibbard-Satterthwaite Games for k-Approval Voting Rules
نویسندگان
چکیده
The Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem implies the existence of voters, called manipulators, who can change the election outcome in their favour by voting strategically. When a given preference profile admits several such manipulators, voting becomes a game played by these voters, who have to reason strategically about each others’ actions. To complicate the game even further, counter-manipulators may then try to counteract the actions of manipulators. Our voters are boundedly rational and do not think beyond manipulating or countermanipulating. We call these games Gibbard–Satterthwaite Games. In this paper we look for conditions that guarantee the existence of a Nash equilibria in pure strategies.
منابع مشابه
Games Gibbard-Satterthwaite Manipulators Play
The Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem implies the ubiquity of manipulators—the voters who could change the election outcome in their favor by unilaterally modifying their vote. In this paper, we ask what happens if a given profile admits several such voters. We model the strategic interactions among these voters, whom we call Gibbard-Satterthwaite manipulators, as a normal-form game. We classify th...
متن کاملGibbard-Satterthwaite Games
The Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem implies the ubiquity of manipulators–voters who could change the election outcome in their favor by unilaterally modifying their vote. In this paper, we ask what happens if a given profile admits several such voters. We model strategic interactions among Gibbard–Satterthwaite manipulators as a normal-form game. We classify the 2-by-2 games that can arise in thi...
متن کاملCan Approximation Circumvent Gibbard-Satterthwaite?
The Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem asserts that any reasonable voting rule cannot be strategyproof. A large body of research in AI deals with circumventing this theorem via computational considerations; the goal is to design voting rules that are computationally hard, in the worst-case, to manipulate. However, recent work indicates that the prominent voting rules are usually easy to manipulate. ...
متن کاملOn the Manipulability of Votes: The Case of Approval Voting
The famous result of Gibbard and Satterthwaite shows that every voting procedure is manipulable if the voters can have any preferences over the candidates. That is, a voter may improve the voting result by not voting according to his true preference. Approval voting, introduced by Brams and Fishburn, is not manipulable if preferences are dichotomous: each voter only distinguishes between accept...
متن کاملCycles and Intractability in Social Choice Theory
We introduce the (j, k)-Kemeny rule – a generalization that aggregates weak orders. Special cases include approval voting, the mean rule and Borda mean rule, as well as the Borda count and plurality voting. Why, then, is the winner problem computationally simple for each of these other rules, but NP -hard for Kemeny? We show that winner intractability for the (j, k)-Kemeny rule first appears at...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- CoRR
دوره abs/1707.05619 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2017