pith. sign in

arxiv: cs/0504075 · v1 · submitted 2005-04-15 · 💻 cs.GT · cs.CC· cs.MA

Dichotomy for Voting Systems

classification 💻 cs.GT cs.CCcs.MA
keywords alphaelectionscoring-protocolsystemsvotingeverymanipulatenp-complete
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Scoring protocols are a broad class of voting systems. Each is defined by a vector $(\alpha_1,\alpha_2,...,\alpha_m)$, $\alpha_1 \geq \alpha_2 \geq >... \geq \alpha_m$, of integers such that each voter contributes $\alpha_1$ points to his/her first choice, $\alpha_2$ points to his/her second choice, and so on, and any candidate receiving the most points is a winner. What is it about scoring-protocol election systems that makes some have the desirable property of being NP-complete to manipulate, while others can be manipulated in polynomial time? We find the complete, dichotomizing answer: Diversity of dislike. Every scoring-protocol election system having two or more point values assigned to candidates other than the favorite--i.e., having $||\{\alpha_i \condition 2 \leq i \leq m\}||\geq 2$--is NP-complete to manipulate. Every other scoring-protocol election system can be manipulated in polynomial time. In effect, we show that--other than trivial systems (where all candidates alway tie), plurality voting, and plurality voting's transparently disguised translations--\emph{every} scoring-protocol election system is NP-complete to manipulate.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.