Complexity of Judgment Aggregation
نویسندگان
چکیده
We analyse the computational complexity of three problems in judgment aggregation: (1) computing a collective judgment from a profile of individual judgments (the winner determination problem); (2) deciding whether a given agent can influence the outcome of a judgment aggregation procedure in her favour by reporting insincere judgments (the strategic manipulation problem); and (3) deciding whether a given judgment aggregation scenario is guaranteed to result in a logically consistent outcome, independently from what the judgments supplied by the individuals are (the problem of the safety of the agenda). We provide results both for specific aggregation procedures (the quota rules, the premisebased procedure, and a distance-based procedure) and for classes of aggregation procedures characterised in terms of fundamental axioms.
منابع مشابه
How Hard Is it to Bribe the Judges? A Study of the Complexity of Bribery in Judgment Aggregation
Endriss et al. [1,2] initiated the complexity-theoretic study of problems related to judgment aggregation. We extend their results for manipulating two specific judgment aggregation procedures to a whole class of such procedures, and we obtain stronger results by considering not only the classical complexity (NP-hardness) but the parameterized complexity (W[2]-hardness) of these problems with r...
متن کاملComplexity of Manipulative Attacks in Judgment Aggregation for Premise-Based Quota Rules1
Endriss et al. [26] initiated the complexity-theoretic study of problems related to judgment aggregation. We extend their results for manipulating two specific judgment aggregation procedures to a whole class of such procedures, namely to uniform premise-based quota rules. In addition, we consider incomplete judgment sets and the notions of top-respecting and closeness-respecting preferences in...
متن کاملParameterized Complexity Results for the Kemeny Rule in Judgment Aggregation
We investigate the parameterized complexity of computing an outcome of the Kemeny rule in judgment aggregation, providing the first parameterized complexity results for this problem for any judgment aggregation procedure. As parameters, we consider (i) the number of issues, (ii) the maximum size of formulas used to represent issues, (iii) the size of the integrity constraint used to restrict th...
متن کاملBribery and Control in Judgment Aggregation1
In computational social choice, the complexity of changing the outcome of elections via manipulation, bribery, and various control actions, such as adding or deleting candidates or voters, has been studied intensely. Endriss et al. [13, 14] initiated the complexity-theoretic study of problems related to judgment aggregation. We extend their results on manipulation to a whole class of judgment a...
متن کاملComplexity Results for Aggregating Judgments using Scoring or Distance-Based Procedures
Judgment aggregation is an abstract framework for studying collective decision making by aggregating individual opinions on logically related issues. Important types of judgment aggregation methods are those of scoring and distance-based methods, many of which can be seen as generalisations of voting rules. An important question to investigate for judgment aggregation methods is how hard it is ...
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:
- J. Artif. Intell. Res.
دوره 45 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2012