White Manipulation in Judgment Aggregation
نویسندگان
چکیده
Distributive systems consisting of autonomous and intelligent components need to be able to reason and make decisions based on the information these components share. Judgment aggregation investigates how individual judgments on logically connected propositions can be aggregated into a collective judgment on the same propositions. It is the case that seemingly reasonable aggregation procedures may force the group to hold an inconsistent judgment set. What happens when the agents realize that the group outcome will be inconsistent? We claim that, in order to avoid an untenable collective outcome, individuals may prefer to declare a non-truthful, less preferred judgment set. Thus, the prospect of an individual trying to manipulate the social outcome by submitting an insincere judgment set is turned from being an undesirable to a “virtuous” (or white) manipulation. We define white manipulation and present the initial study of it as a coordinated action of the whole group.
منابع مشابه
Computational Aspects of Manipulation and Control in Judgment Aggregation
We study computational aspects of various forms of manipulation and control in judgment aggregation, with a focus on the premise-based procedure. For manipulation, we in particular consider incomplete judgment sets and the notions of top-respecting and closeness-respecting preferences introduced by Dietrich and List [DL07]. This complements previous work on the complexity of manipulation in jud...
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 of Judgment Aggregation
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 whet...
متن کاملGroup Manipulation in Judgment Aggregation
We introduce the concept of group manipulation into the study of judgment aggregation and investigate the circumstances under which an aggregation rule may be subject to strategic misrepresentation of judgments by a group of agents. Our focus is on neutral aggregation rules, which treat all propositions to be judged symmetrically, and we assume that agents strategise to minimise the number of p...
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 کامل