Skip to main content

Small Coalitions Cannot Manipulate Voting

  • Conference paper
Financial Cryptography and Data Security (FC 2005)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNSC,volume 3570))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We demonstrate how to make voting protocols resistant against manipulation by computationally bounded malicious voters, by extending the previous results of Conitzer and Sandholm in several important directions: we use one-way functions to close a security loophole that allowed voting officials to exert disproportionate influence on the outcome and show that our hardness results hold against a large fraction of manipulating voters (rather than a single voter). These improvements address important concerns in the field of secure voting systems. We also discuss the limitations of the current approach, showing that it cannot be used to achieve certain very desirable hardness criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bartholdi III., J.J., Orlin, J.B.: Single Transferable Vote Resists Strategic Voting. Social Choice and Welfare 8(4), 341–354 (1991)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Conitzer, V., Sandholm, T.: Complexity of Manipulating Elections with Few Candidates. In: Proceedings of the Eighteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Fourteenth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, July 28 - August 1, pp. 314–319. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Conitzer, V., Sandholm, T.: Universal Voting Protocol Tweaks to Make Manipulation Hard. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), Acapulco, Mexico, August 9-15, pp. 781–788 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gibbard, A.F.: Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result. Econometrica 41, 597–601 (1973)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Satterthwaite, M.A.: The Existence of Strategy-Proof Voting Procedures: A Topic in Social Choice Theory. PhD thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison (1973)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Elkind, E., Lipmaa, H. (2005). Small Coalitions Cannot Manipulate Voting. In: Patrick, A.S., Yung, M. (eds) Financial Cryptography and Data Security. FC 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3570. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11507840_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11507840_25

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-26656-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31680-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics