6 research outputs found
Empirical Evaluation of Real World Tournaments
Computational Social Choice (ComSoc) is a rapidly developing field at the
intersection of computer science, economics, social choice, and political
science. The study of tournaments is fundamental to ComSoc and many results
have been published about tournament solution sets and reasoning in
tournaments. Theoretical results in ComSoc tend to be worst case and tell us
little about performance in practice. To this end we detail some experiments on
tournaments using real wold data from soccer and tennis. We make three main
contributions to the understanding of tournaments using real world data from
English Premier League, the German Bundesliga, and the ATP World Tour: (1) we
find that the NP-hard question of finding a seeding for which a given team can
win a tournament is easily solvable in real world instances, (2) using detailed
and principled methodology from statistical physics we show that our real world
data obeys a log-normal distribution; and (3) leveraging our log-normal
distribution result and using robust statistical methods, we show that the
popular Condorcet Random (CR) tournament model does not generate realistic
tournament data.Comment: 2 Figure
Who Can Win a Single-Elimination Tournament?
A single-elimination (SE) tournament is a popular way to select a winner in
both sports competitions and in elections. A natural and well-studied question
is the tournament fixing problem (TFP): given the set of all pairwise match
outcomes, can a tournament organizer rig an SE tournament by adjusting the
initial seeding so that their favorite player wins? We prove new sufficient
conditions on the pairwise match outcome information and the favorite player,
under which there is guaranteed to be a seeding where the player wins the
tournament. Our results greatly generalize previous results. We also
investigate the relationship between the set of players that can win an SE
tournament under some seeding (so called SE winners) and other traditional
tournament solutions. In addition, we generalize and strengthen prior work on
probabilistic models for generating tournaments. For instance, we show that
\emph{every} player in an player tournament generated by the Condorcet
Random Model will be an SE winner even when the noise is as small as possible,
; prior work only had such results for . We also establish new results for significantly more
general generative models.Comment: A preliminary version appeared in Proceedings of the 30th AAAI
Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 201
Robust Draws in Balanced Knockout Tournaments
Balanced knockout tournaments are ubiquitous in sports competitions and are
also used in decision-making and elections. The traditional computational
question, that asks to compute a draw (optimal draw) that maximizes the winning
probability for a distinguished player, has received a lot of attention.
Previous works consider the problem where the pairwise winning probabilities
are known precisely, while we study how robust is the winning probability with
respect to small errors in the pairwise winning probabilities. First, we
present several illuminating examples to establish: (a)~there exist
deterministic tournaments (where the pairwise winning probabilities are~0 or~1)
where one optimal draw is much more robust than the other; and (b)~in general,
there exist tournaments with slightly suboptimal draws that are more robust
than all the optimal draws. The above examples motivate the study of the
computational problem of robust draws that guarantee a specified winning
probability. Second, we present a polynomial-time algorithm for approximating
the robustness of a draw for sufficiently small errors in pairwise winning
probabilities, and obtain that the stated computational problem is NP-complete.
We also show that two natural cases of deterministic tournaments where the
optimal draw could be computed in polynomial time also admit polynomial-time
algorithms to compute robust optimal draws
Condorcet-Consistent and Approximately Strategyproof Tournament Rules
We consider the manipulability of tournament rules for round-robin
tournaments of competitors. Specifically, competitors are competing for
a prize, and a tournament rule maps the result of all
pairwise matches (called a tournament, ) to a distribution over winners.
Rule is Condorcet-consistent if whenever wins all of her matches,
selects with probability .
We consider strategic manipulation of tournaments where player might
throw their match to player in order to increase the likelihood that one of
them wins the tournament. Regardless of the reason why chooses to do this,
the potential for manipulation exists as long as increases by
more than decreases. Unfortunately, it is known that every
Condorcet-consistent rule is manipulable (Altman and Kleinberg). In this work,
we address the question of how manipulable Condorcet-consistent rules must
necessarily be - by trying to minimize the difference between the increase in
and decrease in for any potential manipulating
pair.
We show that every Condorcet-consistent rule is in fact -manipulable,
and that selecting a winner according to a random single elimination bracket is
not -manipulable for any . We also show that many
previously studied tournament formats are all -manipulable, and the
popular class of Copeland rules (any rule that selects a player with the most
wins) are all in fact -manipulable, the worst possible. Finally, we consider
extensions to match-fixing among sets of more than two players.Comment: 20 page