Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv · cs/0307018

Universal Voting Protocol Tweaks to Make Manipulation Hard

Abstract

Voting is a general method for preference aggregation in multiagent settings, but seminal results have shown that all (nondictatorial) voting protocols are manipulable. One could try to avoid manipulation by using voting protocols where determining a beneficial manipulation is hard computationally. A number of recent papers study the complexity of manipulating existing protocols. This paper is the first work to take the next step of designing new protocols that are especially hard to manipulate. Rather than designing these new protocols from scratch, we instead show how to tweak existing protocols to make manipulation hard, while leaving much of the original nature of the protocol intact. The tweak studied consists of adding one elimination preround to the election. Surprisingly, this extremely simple and universal tweak makes typical protocols hard to manipulate! The protocols become NP-hard, #P-hard, or PSPACE-hard to manipulate, depending on whether the schedule of the preround is determined before the votes are collected, after the votes are collected, or the scheduling and the vote collecting are interleaved, respectively. We prove general sufficient conditions on the protocols for this tweak to introduce the hardness, and show that the most common voting protocols satisfy those conditions. These are the first results in voting settings where manipulation is in a higher complexity class than NP (presuming PSPACE $\neq$ NP).

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Vincent Conitzer, Tuomas Sandholm. 2003-07-07. Universal Voting Protocol Tweaks to Make Manipulation Hard. https://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0307018

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Project Submission Games in Participatory Budgeting

We introduce the framework of project submission games, capturing the behavior of project proposers in participatory budgeting (and multiwinner elections). Here, each proposer submits a subset of project proposals, aiming at maximizing the total cost of those that get funded. We focus on finding conditions under which pure Nash equilibria (NE) exist in our games, and on the complexity of checking whether they exist. We also seek algorithms for computing best responses for the proposers

cs.GT↗

Domination-Avoiding Learning Agents Cannot Collude

An influential paper of Calvano et al. empirically demonstrated that Q-learning agents spontaneously collude when placed as sellers that compete on prices in a natural market model. More recent results of Fish et al. empirically demonstrated that similar collusion happens with commercial LLMs. We formally prove that such collusion can also happen with external-regret-minimizing agents. We identify a very general class of agents, which we term Domination-Avoiding agents, that provably do not collude in such markets. This class contains all Mean-Based agents and all internal-regret-minimizing agents, as well as others such as Multiplicative-Weight agents with variable learning rate and contextual variants thereof. More generally we show that, in any game, this class of agents is guaranteed to jointly learn to almost never play strategies that are eliminated by repeated elimination of purely dominated strategies.

cs.GT↗

Settling the Complexity of Hylland--Zeckhauser Equilibria

The Hylland--Zeckhauser (HZ) mechanism is a foundational framework for allocating indivisible goods in one-sided matching markets via lotteries supported by competitive prices and equal artificial budgets. We resolve the exact computational complexity of the HZ scheme by proving that computing an exact HZ equilibrium is FIXP-complete, thereby settling a conjecture of Vazirani and Yannakakis. Notably, this hardness persists even when computing the equilibrium allocation alone. We establish our hardness result via a reduction that encodes quadratic fixed-point equations into a reciprocal variational inequality. On the algorithmic side, we present a deterministic polynomial-time approximation algorithm that achieves an additive error of $0.0755211 + δ$ for any $δ> 0$, significantly improving upon the previous $1/e$ guarantee.

cs.GT↗