Paradoxes in Sequential Voting

07/11/2018
by   Oren Dean, et al.
0

We analyse strategic, complete information, sequential voting with ordinal preferences over the alternatives. We consider several voting mechanisms: plurality voting and approval voting with deterministic or uniform tie-breaking rules. We show that strategic voting in these voting procedures may lead to a very undesirable outcome: Condorcet winning alternative might be rejected, Condorcet losing alternative might be elected, and Pareto dominated alternative might be elected. These undesirable phenomena occur already with four alternatives and a small number of voters. For the case of three alternatives we present positive and negative results.

READ FULL TEXT

page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4

research
07/22/2019

Strategic Voting Under Uncertainty About the Voting Method

Much of the theoretical work on strategic voting makes strong assumption...
research
07/26/2017

Cognitive Hierarchy and Voting Manipulation

By the Gibbard--Satterthwaite theorem, every reasonable voting rule for ...
research
02/17/2022

Robust Sparse Voting

Many modern Internet applications, like content moderation and recommend...
research
05/30/2022

Fair and Fast Tie-Breaking for Voting

We introduce a notion of fairest tie-breaking for voting w.r.t. two wide...
research
03/17/2023

The Moderating Effect of Instant Runoff Voting

Instant runoff voting (IRV) has recently gained popularity as an alterna...
research
03/12/2021

Phrase-Verified Voting: Verifiable Low-Tech Remote Boardroom Voting

We present Phrase-Verified Voting, a voter-verifiable remote voting syst...
research
10/10/2022

Obvious Independence of Clones

The Independence of Clones (IoC) criterion for social choice functions (...

Please sign up or login with your details

Forgot password? Click here to reset