Measuring Violations of Positive Involvement in Voting

W. Holliday, E. Pacuit
{"title":"Measuring Violations of Positive Involvement in Voting","authors":"W. Holliday, E. Pacuit","doi":"10.4204/EPTCS.335.17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the context of computational social choice, we study voting methods that assign a set of winners to each profile of voter preferences. A voting method satisfies the property of positive involvement (PI) if for any election in which a candidate x would be among the winners, adding another voter to the election who ranks x first does not cause x to lose. Surprisingly, a number of standard voting methods violate this natural property. In this paper, we investigate different ways of measuring the extent to which a voting method violates PI, using computer simulations. We consider the probability (under different probability models for preferences) of PI violations in randomly drawn profiles vs. profile-coalition pairs (involving coalitions of different sizes). We argue that in order to choose between a voting method that satisfies PI and one that does not, we should consider the probability of PI violation conditional on the voting methods choosing different winners. We should also relativize the probability of PI violation to what we call voter potency, the probability that a voter causes a candidate to lose. Although absolute frequencies of PI violations may be low, after this conditioning and relativization, we see that under certain voting methods that violate PI, much of a voter's potency is turned against them - in particular, against their desire to see their favorite candidate elected.","PeriodicalId":118894,"journal":{"name":"Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge","volume":"06 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.335.17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

In the context of computational social choice, we study voting methods that assign a set of winners to each profile of voter preferences. A voting method satisfies the property of positive involvement (PI) if for any election in which a candidate x would be among the winners, adding another voter to the election who ranks x first does not cause x to lose. Surprisingly, a number of standard voting methods violate this natural property. In this paper, we investigate different ways of measuring the extent to which a voting method violates PI, using computer simulations. We consider the probability (under different probability models for preferences) of PI violations in randomly drawn profiles vs. profile-coalition pairs (involving coalitions of different sizes). We argue that in order to choose between a voting method that satisfies PI and one that does not, we should consider the probability of PI violation conditional on the voting methods choosing different winners. We should also relativize the probability of PI violation to what we call voter potency, the probability that a voter causes a candidate to lose. Although absolute frequencies of PI violations may be low, after this conditioning and relativization, we see that under certain voting methods that violate PI, much of a voter's potency is turned against them - in particular, against their desire to see their favorite candidate elected.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
衡量积极参与投票的违规行为
在计算社会选择的背景下,我们研究了将一组获胜者分配给选民偏好的投票方法。如果在任何候选人x可能成为获胜者的选举中,在选举中增加另一个排在x前面的选民不会导致x失败,则投票方法满足正参与(PI)的性质。令人惊讶的是,许多标准投票方法违反了这一自然属性。在本文中,我们研究了使用计算机模拟来测量投票方法违反PI的程度的不同方法。我们考虑随机绘制的轮廓与轮廓-联盟对(涉及不同规模的联盟)中PI违反的概率(在不同的偏好概率模型下)。我们认为,为了在满足PI和不满足PI的投票方法之间进行选择,我们应该考虑违反PI的概率,条件是投票方法选择不同的获胜者。我们还应该将违反PI的概率与我们所说的选民效力相对化,即选民导致候选人失败的概率。尽管违反PI的绝对频率可能很低,但在这种条件和相对化之后,我们看到,在某些违反PI的投票方法下,选民的大部分效力都转而反对他们——特别是反对他们希望看到自己喜欢的候选人当选的愿望。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Strengthening Consistency Results in Modal Logic A Logic-Based Analysis of Responsibility Epistemic Logics of Structured Intensional Groups Complete Conditional Type Structures (Extended Abstract) Selling Data to a Competitor
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1