How Hard Is It to Control an Election by Breaking Ties?

We study the computational complexity of controlling the result of an election by breaking ties strategically. This problem is equivalent to the problem of deciding the winner of an election under parallel universes tie-breaking. When the chair of the election is only asked to break ties to choose between one of the co-winners, the problem is trivially easy. However, in multi-round elections, we prove that it can be NP-hard for the chair to compute how to break ties to ensure a given result. Additionally, we show that the form of the tie-breaking function can increase the opportunities for control. Indeed, we prove that it can be NP-hard to control an election by breaking ties even with a two-stage voting rule.Comment: Revised and expanded version including longer proofs and additional result

Schulze and Ranked-Pairs Voting are Fixed-Parameter Tractable to Bribe, Manipulate, and Control

Schulze and ranked-pairs elections have received much attention recently, and the former has quickly become a quite widely used election system. For many cases these systems have been proven resistant to bribery, control, or manipulation, with ranked pairs being particularly praised for being NP-hard for all three of those. Nonetheless, the present paper shows that with respect to the number of candidates, Schulze and ranked-pairs elections are fixed-parameter tractable to bribe, control, and manipulate: we obtain uniform, polynomial-time algorithms whose degree does not depend on the number of candidates. We also provide such algorithms for some weighted variants of these problems

Complexity of Manipulative Actions When Voting with Ties

Most of the computational study of election problems has assumed that each voter's preferences are, or should be extended to, a total order. However in practice voters may have preferences with ties. We study the complexity of manipulative actions on elections where voters can have ties, extending the definitions of the election systems (when necessary) to handle voters with ties. We show that for natural election systems allowing ties can both increase and decrease the complexity of manipulation and bribery, and we state a general result on the effect of voters with ties on the complexity of control.Comment: A version of this paper will appear in ADT-201

Social Welfare and Coercion in Public Finance

This paper develops an expanded framework for social planning in which the existence of coercion is explicitly acknowledged. Key issues concern the precise definition of coercion for individuals and in the aggregate, its difference from redistribution, and its incorporation into normative analysis. We explore modifications to traditional rules for optimal fiscal policy in the presence of coercion constraints and determine the degree of coercion implied by traditional social planning. The paper maps the trade-off between social welfare and aggregate coercion and explores its implications for normative policy and the comparative evaluation of institutions, including competitive democracy.coercion, redistribution, social planning, optimal fiscal policy, marginal cost of funds, public goods, collective choice