Computational Aspects of Nearly Single-Peaked Electorates

Manipulation, bribery, and control are well-studied ways of changing the outcome of an election. Many voting rules are, in the general case, computationally resistant to some of these manipulative actions. However when restricted to single-peaked electorates, these rules suddenly become easy to manipulate. Recently, Faliszewski, Hemaspaandra, and Hemaspaandra studied the computational complexity of strategic behavior in nearly single-peaked electorates. These are electorates that are not single-peaked but close to it according to some distance measure. In this paper we introduce several new distance measures regarding single-peakedness. We prove that determining whether a given profile is nearly single-peaked is NP-complete in many cases. For one case we present a polynomial-time algorithm. In case the single-peaked axis is given, we show that determining the distance is always possible in polynomial time. Furthermore, we explore the relations between the new notions introduced in this paper and existing notions from the literature.Comment: Published in the Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR). A short version of this paper appeared in the proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2013). An even earlier version appeared in the proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Computational Social Choice 2012 (COMSOC 2012

Reinstating Combinatorial Protections for Manipulation and Bribery in Single-Peaked and Nearly Single-Peaked Electorates

Understanding when and how computational complexity can be used to protect elections against different manipulative actions has been a highly active research area over the past two decades. A recent body of work, however, has shown that many of the NP-hardness shields, previously obtained, vanish when the electorate has single-peaked or nearly single-peaked preferences. In light of these results, we investigate whether it is possible to reimpose NP-hardness shields for such electorates by allowing the voters to specify partial preferences instead of insisting they cast complete ballots. In particular, we show that in single-peaked and nearly single-peaked electorates, if voters are allowed to submit top-truncated ballots, then the complexity of manipulation and bribery for many voting rules increases from being in P to being NP-complete.Comment: 28 pages; A shorter version of this paper will appear at the 30th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-16

Testing Top Monotonicity

Top monotonicity is a relaxation of various well-known domain restrictions such as single-peaked and single-crossing for which negative impossibility results are circumvented and for which the median-voter theorem still holds. We examine the problem of testing top monotonicity and present a characterization of top monotonicity with respect to non-betweenness constraints. We then extend the definition of top monotonicity to partial orders and show that testing top monotonicity of partial orders is NP-complete

Structure in Dichotomous Preferences

Many hard computational social choice problems are known to become tractable when voters' preferences belong to a restricted domain, such as those of single-peaked or single-crossing preferences. However, to date, all algorithmic results of this type have been obtained for the setting where each voter's preference list is a total order of candidates. The goal of this paper is to extend this line of research to the setting where voters' preferences are dichotomous, i.e., each voter approves a subset of candidates and disapproves the remaining candidates. We propose several analogues of the notions of single-peaked and single-crossing preferences for dichotomous profiles and investigate the relationships among them. We then demonstrate that for some of these notions the respective restricted domains admit efficient algorithms for computationally hard approval-based multi-winner rules.Comment: A preliminary version appeared in the proceedings of IJCAI 2015, the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligenc

Divergent Platforms

A robust feature of models of electoral competition between two opportunistic, purely office-motivated parties is that both parties become indistinguishable in equilibrium. I this short note, I show that this strong connection between the office motivation of parties and their equilibrium choice of identical platforms depends on the following two - possibly counterfactual - assumptions: 1. Issue spaces are uni-dimensional and 2. Parties are unitary actors whose preferences can be represented by expected utility functions. The main goal here is to provide an example of a two-party model in which parties offer substantially different platforms in equilibrium even though no exogenous asymmetries are assumed. In this example, some voters’ preferences over the 2-dimensional issue space are assumed to exhibit non-convexities and parties evaluate their actions with respect to a set of beliefs on the electorate.Downs model, Games with Incomplete Preferences, Knightian Uncertainty, Uncertainty Aversion, Platform Divergence

Divergent platforms

Models of electoral competition between two opportunistic, office-motivated parties typically predict that both parties become indistinguishable in equilibrium. I show that this strong connection between the office motivation of parties and their equilibrium choice of identical platforms depends on two—possibly false—assumptions: (1) Issue spaces are uni-dimensional and (2) Parties are unitary actors whose preferences can be represented by expected utilities. I provide an example of a two-party model in which parties offer substantially different equilibrium platforms even though no exogenous differences between parties are assumed. In this example, some voters’ preferences over the 2-dimensional issue space exhibit non-convexities and parties evaluate their actions with respect to a set of beliefs on the electorate

The Shield that Never Was: Societies with Single-Peaked Preferences are More Open to Manipulation and Control

Much work has been devoted, during the past twenty years, to using complexity to protect elections from manipulation and control. Many results have been obtained showing NP-hardness shields, and recently there has been much focus on whether such worst-case hardness protections can be bypassed by frequently correct heuristics or by approximations. This paper takes a very different approach: We argue that when electorates follow the canonical political science model of societal preferences the complexity shield never existed in the first place. In particular, we show that for electorates having single-peaked preferences, many existing NP-hardness results on manipulation and control evaporate.Comment: 38 pages, 2 figure

Single-Peaked Consistency for Weak Orders Is Easy

In economics and social choice single-peakedness is one of the most important and commonly studied models for preferences. It is well known that single-peaked consistency for total orders is in P. However in practice a preference profile is not always comprised of total orders. Often voters have indifference between some of the candidates. In a weak preference order indifference must be transitive. We show that single-peaked consistency for weak orders is in P for three different variants of single-peakedness for weak orders. Specifically, we consider Black's original definition of single-peakedness for weak orders, Black's definition of single-plateaued preferences, and the existential model recently introduced by Lackner. We accomplish our results by transforming each of these single-peaked consistency problems to the problem of determining if a 0-1 matrix has the consecutive ones property.Comment: In Proceedings TARK 2015, arXiv:1606.0729