When are elections with few candidates hard to manipulate?
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
On the robustness of preference aggregation in noisy environments
Proceedings of the 6th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems
Universal voting protocol tweaks to make manipulation hard
IJCAI'03 Proceedings of the 18th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
How do noise and manipulation affect the accuracy of collective decision rules? This paper presents simulation results that measure the accuracy of ten well known collective decision rules under noise and manipulation. When noise is low these rules can be divided into accurate ("good") and inaccurate ("bad") groups. The bad rules' accuracy improves, sometimes significantly, when noise increases while the good rules' performance steadily worsens with noise. Also, when noise increases the accuracy of the good rules deteriorates at different rates. Manipulation delays the effects of noise: accuracy improvement and deterioration due to noise emerge only at higher noise levels with manipulation than without it. In some cases at high noise levels there is only a negligible difference between the accuracy of good and bad collective decision rules.