Skip to main content

Simultaneous Elicitation of Scoring Rule and Agent Preferences for Robust Winner Determination

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Algorithmic Decision Theory (ADT 2021)

Abstract

Social choice deals with the problem of determining a consensus choice from the preferences of different agents. In the classical setting, the voting rule is fixed beforehand and full information concerning the preferences of the agents is provided. This assumption of full preference information has recently been questioned by a number of researchers and several methods for eliciting the preferences of the agents have been proposed. In this paper we argue that in many situations one should consider as well the voting rule to be partially specified. Focusing on positional scoring rules, we assume that the chair, while not able to give a precise definition of the rule, is capable of answering simple questions requiring to pick a winner from a concrete profile. In addition, we assume that the agent preferences also have to be elicited. We propose a method for robust approximate winner determination and interactive elicitation based on minimax regret; we develop several strategies for choosing the questions to ask to the chair and the agents in order to converge quickly to a near-optimal alternative. Finally, we analyze these strategies in experiments where the rule and the preferences are simultaneously elicited.

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 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baumeister, D., Hogrebe, T.: Manipulative design of scoring systems. In: Proceedings of AAMAS 2019 (2019). https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3306127.3331928

  2. Benabbou, N., Di Sabatino Di Diodoro, S., Perny, P., Viappiani, P.: Incremental preference elicitation in multi-attribute domains for choice and ranking with the borda count. In: Proceedings of SUM 2016 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Boutilier, C., Patrascu, R., Poupart, P., Schuurmans, D.: Constraint-based optimization and utility elicitation using the minimax decision criterion. Artif. Intell. (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2006.02.003

  4. Braziunas, D.: Decision-theoretic elicitation of generalized additive utilities. Ph.D. thesis (2012). https://dl.acm.org/doi/book/10.5555/2519022

  5. Cailloux, O., Endriss, U.: Eliciting a suitable voting rule via examples. In: Proceedings of ECAI 2014 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-419-0-183

  6. Conitzer, V.: Eliciting single-peaked preferences using comparison queries. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (2009). https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.2606

  7. Conitzer, V., Sandholm, T.: Communication complexity of common voting rules. In: Proceedings of EC 2005 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1145/1064009.1064018

  8. Conitzer, V., Walsh, T., Xia, L.: Dominating manipulations in voting with partial information. In: AAAI 2011 (2011). https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2900423.2900525

  9. Dey, P., Misra, N.: Preference elicitation for single crossing domain. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2016 (2016). https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3060621.3060653

  10. Dey, P., Misra, N., Narahari, Y.: Complexity of manipulation with partial information in voting. Theor. Comput. Sci. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2018.03.012

  11. Elkind, E., Erdélyi, G.: Manipulation under voting rule uncertainty. In: Proceedings of AAMAS 2012 (2012). https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2343776.2343786

  12. Endriss, U., Obraztsova, S., Polukarov, M., Rosenschein, J.S.: Strategic voting with incomplete information. In: IJCAI 2016 (2016). https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3060621.3060655

  13. Giritligil, A., Sertel, M., Kara, A.: Does majoritarian approval matter in selecting a social choice rule? an exploratory panel study. Soc. Choice Welfare (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-005-0024-8

  14. Kalech, M., Kraus, S., Kaminka, G.A., Goldman, C.V.: Practical voting rules with partial information. Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst. (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-010-9133-6

  15. Konczak, K., Lang, J.: Voting procedures with incomplete preferences. In: IJCAI 2005 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kouvelis, P., Yu, G.: Robust Discrete Optimization and Its Applications. Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lev, O., Meir, R., Obraztsova, S., Polukarov, M.: Heuristic voting as ordinal dominance strategies. In: Proceedings of the AAAI 2019 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33012077

  18. Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P.: The Construction of Preference. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2006).https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618031

  19. Llamazares, B.: Ranking candidates through convex sequences of variable weights. Group Decis. Negot. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-015-9452-8

  20. Llamazares, B., Peña, T.: Aggregating preferences rankings with variable weights. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.04.013

  21. Lu, T., Boutilier, C.: Robust approximation and incremental elicitation in voting protocols. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2011 (2011). https://doi.org/10.5591/978-1-57735-516-8/IJCAI11-058

  22. Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M.D., Green, J.R.: Microeconomic Theory (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mattei, N., Walsh, T.: Preflib: a library of preference data preflib.org. In: Proceedings of ADT 2013 (2013). https://www.preflib.org/

  24. Naamani-Dery, L., Golan, I., Kalech, M., Rokach, L.: Preference elicitation for group decisions using the borda voting rule. Group Decis. Negot. (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-015-9427-9

  25. Pini, M.S., Rossi, F., Venable, K.B., Walsh, T.: Incompleteness and incomparability in preference aggregation. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2007 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2010.11.009

  26. Pini, M.S., Rossi, F., Venable, K.B., Walsh, T.: Aggregating partially ordered preferences. J. Log. Comput. (2009). https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exn012

  27. Reijngoud, A., Endriss, U.: Voter response to iterated poll information. In: Proceedings of AAMAS 2012 (2012). https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2343776.2343787

  28. Salo, A.A., Hämäläinen, R.P.: Preference ratios in multiattribute evaluation (PRIME)-elicitation and decision procedures under incomplete information. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. (2001). https://doi.org/10.1109/3468.983411

  29. Savage, L.J.: The Foundations of Statistics. Wiley, Hoboken (1954)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Stein, W.E., Mizzi, P.J., Pfaffenberger, R.C.: A stochastic dominance analysis of ranked voting systems with scoring. EJOR (1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(94)90205-4

  31. Viappiani, P.: Positional scoring rules with uncertain weights. In: Ciucci, D., Pasi, G., Vantaggi, B. (eds.) SUM 2018. LNCS, vol. 11142, pp. 306–320. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00461-3_21

  32. Walsh, T.: Uncertainty in preference elicitation and aggregation. In: Proceedings of AAAI 2007 (2007). https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1619645.1619648

  33. Walsh, T.: Complexity of terminating preference elicitation. In: Proceedings of AAMAS 2008 (2008). https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.5555/1402298.1402357

  34. Xia, L., Conitzer, V.: Determining possible and necessary winners under common voting rules given partial orders. In: Proceedings of AAAI 2008 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.3186

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Beatrice Napolitano .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Napolitano, B., Cailloux, O., Viappiani, P. (2021). Simultaneous Elicitation of Scoring Rule and Agent Preferences for Robust Winner Determination. In: Fotakis, D., Ríos Insua, D. (eds) Algorithmic Decision Theory. ADT 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13023. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87756-9_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87756-9_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-87755-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-87756-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics