Complexity of Computing the Margin of Victory for Various Voting Rules CAEC, Nov. 18, 2011 Ronald L. RivestEmily ShenLirong Xia.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
On the Robustness of Preference Aggregation in Noisy Environments Ariel D. Procaccia, Jeffrey S. Rosenschein and Gal A. Kaminka.
Advertisements

Voting and social choice Vincent Conitzer
Algorithmic Game Theory Uri Feige Robi Krauthgamer Moni Naor Lecture 9: Social Choice Lecturer: Moni Naor.
Math 1010 ‘Mathematical Thought and Practice’ An active learning approach to a liberal arts mathematics course.
Voting and social choice Looking at a problem from the designers point of view.
Speaker: Ariel Procaccia 1 Joint work with: Ioannis Caragiannis 2, Jason Covey 3, Michal Feldman 1, Chris Homan 3, Christos Kaklamanis 2, Nikos Karanikolas.
How “impossible” is it to design a Voting rule? Angelina Vidali University of Athens.
IMPOSSIBILITY AND MANIPULABILITY Section 9.3 and Chapter 10.
Chapter 1: Methods of Voting
Muppets Use Instant Runoff Voting. Starting in the early '90s, the Henson production company started to pay the Muppets with stock options rather than.
VOTING SYSTEMS Section 2.5.
MAT 105 Spring  There are many more methods for determining the winner of an election with more than two candidates  We will only discuss a few.
Instant Runoff Voting Presented By: Deborah Markowitz Vermont Secretary of State.
Excursions in Modern Mathematics Sixth Edition
+ Random Tie Breaking Toby Walsh NICTA and UNSW. + Random Tie Breaking Haris Aziz, Serge Gaspers, Nick Mattei, Nina Narodytska, Toby Walsh NICTA and UNSW.
Math for Liberal Studies.  There are many more methods for determining the winner of an election with more than two candidates  We will only discuss.
Using computational hardness as a barrier against manipulation Vincent Conitzer
Speaker: Ariel Procaccia Joint work with: Michael Zuckerman, Jeff Rosenschein Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Ties Matter: Complexity of Voting Manipulation Revisited based on joint work with Svetlana Obraztsova (NTU/PDMI) and Noam Hazon (CMU) Edith Elkind (Nanyang.
CPS Voting and social choice
Social choice theory = preference aggregation = voting assuming agents tell the truth about their preferences Tuomas Sandholm Professor Computer Science.
Complexity of unweighted coalitional manipulation under some common voting rules Lirong XiaVincent Conitzer COMSOC08, Sep. 3-5, 2008 TexPoint fonts used.
Automated Design of Voting Rules by Learning From Examples Ariel D. Procaccia, Aviv Zohar, Jeffrey S. Rosenschein.
Strategic Behavior in Multi-Winner Elections A follow-up on previous work by Ariel Procaccia, Aviv Zohar and Jeffrey S. Rosenschein Reshef Meir The School.
1 The Process of Computing Election Victories Computational Sociology: Social Choice and Voting Methods CS110: Introduction to Computer Science – Lab Module.
Group Decision Making Y. İlker TOPCU, Ph.D twitter.com/yitopcu.
Introduction complexity has been suggested as a means of precluding strategic behavior. Previous studies have shown that some voting protocols are hard.
Social choice (voting) Vincent Conitzer > > > >
Historically Interesting Voting Rules: Electing the Doge Lirong Xia Toby Walsh Auckland, Feb 20 th 2012.
Social Choice Lecture 19 John Hey.
Arrow’s Theorem The search for the perfect election decision procedure.
CPS Voting and social choice Vincent Conitzer
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 15 Section 2 - Slide Election Theory Flaws of Voting.
Optimal Manipulation of Voting Rules Edith Elkind Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (based on joint work with Svetlana Obraztsova)
Chapter 10: The Manipulability of Voting Systems Lesson Plan An Introduction to Manipulability Majority Rule and Condorcet’s Method The Manipulability.
Math for Liberal Studies.  We have seen many methods, all of them flawed in some way  Which method should we use?  Maybe we shouldn’t use any of them,
Let’s take a class vote. How many of you are registered to vote?
Voting Methods Examples of Voting Methods (other than majority rules) –Plurality –Borda Count –Hare System –Sequential Pairwise –Approval Voting.
Section 1.1, Slide 1 Copyright © 2014, 2010, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Section 11.1, Slide 1 11 Voting Using Mathematics to Make Choices.
Why We Should Use the Plurality with Elimination Voting Method.
The Mathematics of Voting Chapter 1. Preference Ballot A Ballot in which the voters are asked to rank the candidates in order of preference. 1. Brownies.
Copyright 2013, 2010, 2007, Pearson, Education, Inc. Section 15.2 Flaws of Voting.
Electoral College. Next Step = National Convention! Caucus PRIMARY NATIONAL CONVENTION.
Chapter 9: Social Choice: The Impossible Dream Lesson Plan Voting and Social Choice Majority Rule and Condorcet’s Method Other Voting Systems for Three.
 Harder than you might think  There are many examples in history where the results were disputed.
1 The Process of Computing Election Victories Computational Sociology: Social Choice and Voting Methods CS110: Introduction to Computer Science – Lab Module.
Voting: Does the Majority Always Rule?
Ronald L. Rivest MIT NASEM Future of Voting Meeting June 12, 2017
Plurality with elimination, Runoff method, Condorcet criterion
Chapter 10: The Manipulability of Voting Systems Lesson Plan
Introduction to Social Choice
Social choice theory = preference aggregation = voting assuming agents tell the truth about their preferences Tuomas Sandholm Professor Computer Science.
Chapter 9: Social Choice: The Impossible Dream Lesson Plan
8.2 Voting Possibilities and Fairness Criteria
Algorithmic Analysis of Elections: Voting Rules and Manipulability (minicourse) Piotr Faliszewski AGH University Kraków, Poland.
1.3 The Borda Count Method.
Warm Up – 1/23 - Thursday How many people voted in the election?
Manipulation Lirong Xia Fall, Manipulation Lirong Xia Fall, 2016.
Classwork: p.33 (27abc run off, 29ab run off, 31, 33ab run off)
Section 15.2 Flaws of Voting
5-2 Election Theory Flaws of Voting.
Voting systems Chi-Kwong Li.
Voting and social choice
Muppets Use Instant Runoff Voting
MAT 105 Fall 2008 More Voting Methods.
Introduction to Social Choice
CPS 173 Voting and social choice
Computational Social Choice (Part II: Bribery and Friends)
Flaws of the Voting Methods
CPS Voting and social choice
Presentation transcript:

Complexity of Computing the Margin of Victory for Various Voting Rules CAEC, Nov. 18, 2011 Ronald L. RivestEmily ShenLirong Xia

Voting > voting rule > 1

Criteria for voting rules Lots of voting rules (plurality, approval, instant runoff voting, etc.) – How to choose one? “Traditional” criteria: monotonicity, consistency, majority, etc. More recently: computational complexity of manipulation (strategic voting) We consider: efficient auditability – specifically, computational complexity of computing margin of victory (related to manipulation problems)

Definition: Given a profile of ballots, the margin of victory is the smallest number k such that k modified ballots could change the election winner Margin of victory is critical to efficient, effective post-election audits –To provide a given level of statistical confidence, landslide election requires much less checking than a close election Margin of victory is a measure of closeness of election, suggests level of political mandate won by winner 3 Margin of Victory (MoV)

Plurality –A:10 votes, B: 15 votes, C: 4 votes –Margin of victory = 3 Instant-runoff voting (IRV) –Margin of victory = 1 4 Margin of Victory Examples

Computational problem MoV: compute margin of victory of a profile of ballots Decision problem MoVk: Is the margin of victory at most k? MoV problem closely related to previously studied manipulation problems: UCM, bribery 5 The MoV computational problem

6 Margin of Victory & Related Manipulation Problems ProblemObjectiveBy Desired Complexity Margin of Victory Change the winner Changing votesLow Unweighted Coalitional Manipulation Make a given candidate win Adding votesHigh Bribery Make a given candidate win Changing votesHigh

7 Our Results Voting rule Margin of Victory Unweighted Coalitional Manipulation Positional scoring rules Including Borda P P (1 manipulator) [BTT89] NPC (2 or more) [XCP10] [DKNW11] [BNW11] Plurality with runoffPP [ZPR09] CopelandNPC and FPT P (1 manipulator) [BTT89] NPC (2 or more) [FHS08,10] MaximinNPC and FPT P (1 manipulator) [BTT89] NPC (2 or more) [XZP + 09] STVNPC for MoV 1 NPC [BO91] Ranked pairsNPC for MoV 1 NPC [XZP + 09] Nanson’s rule?NPC [NWX11] Baldwin’s rule?NPC [NWX11] This work

Let d be the current winner For every k –Check whether there is a way to make d not in the runoff by changing k votes –Check for every adversarial c, every threshold l, whether there is a way to change k votes such that c and d are ranked at the top for at least l times Any other alternative is ranked at the top for no more than l times c beats d in their pairwise election 8 Poly-time margin algorithm for plurality with runoff

Proof by reduction from unweighted coalitional manipulation problem Tweak UCM1 profile P to get new profile P’ by: –Adding a new candidate d –Ranking d just below c in P –Adding | P |+ 1 voters who all rank d as 1st choice Show: MoV of P’ is 1 if and only if UCM1 has a solution 9 IRV Margin of Victory = 1 is NP-Complete

We studied complexity of computing the margin of victory for some common voting rules Future work: Complexity of MoVk (k > 1) for IRV, ranked pairs Practical algorithms to compute/approximate margin of victory for IRV, ranked pairs –Heuristics, approximation algorithms 10 Summary and Future Work