Impossibility theorems involving weakenings of expansion consistency and resoluteness in voting

A fundamental principle of individual rational choice is Sen's $\gamma$ axiom, also known as expansion consistency, stating that any alternative chosen from each of two menus must be chosen from the union of the menus. Expansion consistency can also be formulated in the setting of social choice. In voting theory, it states that any candidate chosen from two fields of candidates must be chosen from the combined field of candidates. An important special case of the axiom is binary expansion consistency, which states that any candidate chosen from an initial field of candidates and chosen in a head-to-head match with a new candidate must also be chosen when the new candidate is added to the field, thereby ruling out spoiler effects. In this paper, we study the tension between this weakening of expansion consistency and weakenings of resoluteness, an axiom demanding the choice of a single candidate in any election. As is well known, resoluteness is inconsistent with basic fairness conditions on social choice, namely anonymity and neutrality. Here we prove that even significant weakenings of resoluteness, which are consistent with anonymity and neutrality, are inconsistent with binary expansion consistency. The proofs make use of SAT solving, with the correctness of a SAT encoding formally verified in the Lean Theorem Prover, as well as a strategy for generalizing impossibility theorems obtained for special types of voting methods (namely majoritarian and pairwise voting methods) to impossibility theorems for arbitrary voting methods. This proof strategy may be of independent interest for its potential applicability to other impossibility theorems in social choice.Comment: Forthcoming in Mathematical Analyses of Decisions, Voting, and Games, eds. M. A. Jones, D. McCune, and J. Wilson, Contemporary Mathematics, American Mathematical Society, 202

Essays on the Computation of Economic Equilibria and Its Applications.

The computation of economic equilibria is a central problem in algorithmic game theory. In this dissertation, we investigate the existence of economic equilibria in several markets and games, the complexity of computing economic equilibria, and its application to rankings. It is well known that a competitive economy always has an equilibrium under mild conditions. In this dissertation, we study the complexity of computing competitive equilibria. We show that given a competitive economy that fully respects all the conditions of Arrow-Debreu's existence theorem, it is PPAD-hard to compute an approximate competitive equilibrium. Furthermore, it is still PPAD-Complete to compute an approximate equilibrium for economies with additively separable piecewise linear concave utility functions. Degeneracy is an important concept in game theory. We study the complexity of deciding degeneracy in games. We show that it is NP-Complete to decide whether a bimatrix game is degenerate. With the advent of the Internet, an agent can easily have access to multiple accounts. In this dissertation we study the path auction game, which is a model for QoS routing, supply chain management, and so on, with multiple edge ownership. We show that the condition of multiple edge ownership eliminates the possibility of reasonable solution concepts, such as a strategyproof or false-name-proof mechanism or Pareto efficient Nash equilibria. The stationary distribution (an equilibrium point) of a Markov chain is widely used for ranking purposes. One of the most important applications is PageRank, part of the ranking algorithm of Google. By making use of perturbation theories of Markov chains, we show the optimal manipulation strategies of a Web spammer against PageRank under a few natural constraints. Finally, we make a connection between the ranking vector of PageRank or the Invariant method and the equilibrium of a Cobb-Douglas market. Furthermore, we propose the CES ranking method based on the Constant Elasticity of Substitution (CES) utility functions.Ph.D.Computer Science & EngineeringUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/64821/1/duye_1.pd

PageRank as a Weak Tournament Solution

We observe that ranking systems—a theoretical framework for web page ranking and collaborative filtering introduced by Altman and Tennenholtz—and tournament solutions—a well-studied area of social choice theory—are strongly related. This relationship permits a mutual transfer of axioms and solution concepts. As a first step, we formally analyze a tournament solution that is based on Google’s PageRank algorithm and study its interrelationships with common tournament solutions. It turns out that the PageRank set is always contained in both the Schwartz set and the uncovered set, but may be disjoint from most other tournament solutions. While PageRank does not satisfy various standard properties from the tournament literature, it can be much more discriminatory than established tournament solutions