Skip to main content

Manipulation of Weighted Voting Games and the Effect of Quota

  • Conference paper
Agents and Artificial Intelligence (ICAART 2011)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 271))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 914 Accesses

Abstract

The Shapley-Shubik, Banzhaf, and Deegan-Packel indices are three prominent power indices for measuring voters’ power in weighted voting games. We consider two methods of manipulating weighted voting games, called annexation and merging. These manipulations allow either an agent, called an annexer to take over the voting weights of some other agents, or the coming together of some agents to form a bloc of manipulators to have more power over the outcomes of the games. We evaluate the extent of susceptibility to these forms of manipulation and the effect of the quota of a game on these manipulation for the three indices. Experiments on weighted voting games suggest that the three indices are highly susceptible to annexation while they are less susceptible to merging. In both annexation and merging, the Shapley-Shubik index is the most susceptible to manipulation among the indices. Further experiments on the effect of quotas of weighted voting games suggest the existence of an inverse relationship between the susceptibility of the indices to manipulation and the quotas for both annexation and merging. Thus, weighted voting games with large quota values closer to the total weight of agents in the games may be less vulnerable to annexation and merging than those with corresponding smaller quota values.

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. Alonso-Meijide, J.M., Bowles, C.: Generating Functions for Coalitional Power Indices: An Application to the IMF. Annals of Operations Research 137, 21–44 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Aziz, H., Paterson, M.: False-name Manipulations in Weighted Voting Games: splitting, merging and annexation. In: 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Budapest, Hungary, pp. 409–416 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aziz, H., Paterson, M., Leech, D.: Combinatorial and Computational Aspects of Multiple Weighted Voting Games. The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 823, University of Warwick, Department of Economics (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bachrach, Y., Elkind, E.: Divide and Conquer: False-name Manipulations in Weighted Voting Games. In: 7th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2008), Estoril, Portugal, pp. 975–982 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bachrach, Y., Markakis, E., Procaccia, A.D., Rosenschein, J.S., Saberi, A.: Approximating Power Indices - Theoretical and Empirical Analysis. Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems 20(2), 105–122 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Deng, X., Papadimitriou, C.H.: On the Complexity of Cooperative Solution Concepts. Mathematics of Operations Research 19(2), 257–266 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Garey, M.R., Johnson, D.S.: Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W.H. Freeman, San Fransisco (1979)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Kirsch, W.: On Penrose’s Squareoot Law and Beyond. Homo Oeconomicus 24(3,4), 357–380 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kirsch, W., Langner, J.: Power Indices and Minimal Winning Coalitions. Social Choice and Welfare 34(1), 33–46 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Laruelle, A.: On the Choice of a Power Index. Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Economicas 2103, 99–10 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Laruelle, A., Valenciano, F.: Assessing Success and Decisiveness in Voting Situations. Social Choice and Welfare 24(1), 171–197 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Lasisi, R.O., Allan, V.H.: False Name Manipulations in Weighted Voting Games: Susceptibility of Power Indices. In 13th International Workshop on Trust in Agents Societies, Toronto, Canada, pp. 139–150 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lasisi, R.O., Allan, V.H.: Annexations and Merging in Weighted Voting Games: The Extent of Susceptibility of Power Indices. In: 3rd International Conference of ICAART, Rome, Italy, pp. 124 –133 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Leech, D.: Voting Power in the Governance of the International Monetary Fund. Annals of Operations Research 109(1), 375–397 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Machover, M., Felsenthal, D.S.: Annexation and Alliances: When Are Blocs Advantageous a Priori. Social Choice and Welfare 19(2), 295–312 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Matsui, T., Matsui, Y.: A Survey of Algorithms for Calculating Power Indices of Weighted Majority Games. Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan 43(1) (2000)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Lasisi, R.O., Allan, V.H. (2013). Manipulation of Weighted Voting Games and the Effect of Quota. In: Filipe, J., Fred, A. (eds) Agents and Artificial Intelligence. ICAART 2011. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 271. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29966-7_27

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29966-7_27

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-29965-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-29966-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics