Voting for movies: the anatomy of a recommender system
Proceedings of the third annual conference on Autonomous Agents
Rank aggregation methods for the Web
Proceedings of the 10th international conference on World Wide Web
The new FIFA rules are hard: complexity aspects of sports competitions
Discrete Applied Mathematics
Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness
Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness
A heuristic technique for multi-agent planning
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence
Journal of Computer and System Sciences
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
A sufficient condition for voting rules to be frequently manipulable
Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Electronic commerce
Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems - Volume 2
Elections Can be Manipulated Often
FOCS '08 Proceedings of the 2008 49th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
Algorithms for the coalitional manipulation problem
Artificial Intelligence
Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge
Approximability of manipulating elections
AAAI'08 Proceedings of the 23rd national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
Junta distributions and the average-case complexity of manipulating elections
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
Universal voting protocol tweaks to make manipulation hard
IJCAI'03 Proceedings of the 18th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence
Llull and Copeland voting computationally resist bribery and constructive control
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
Complexity of unweighted coalitional manipulation under some common voting rules
IJCAI'09 Proceedings of the 21st international jont conference on Artifical intelligence
Small coalitions cannot manipulate voting
FC'05 Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security
Multimode control attacks on elections
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
Determining possible and necessary winners under common voting rules given partial orders
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
Taking the final step to a full dichotomy of the possible winner problem in pure scoring rules
Information Processing Letters
Coalitional voting manipulation: a game-theoretic perspective
IJCAI'11 Proceedings of the Twenty-Second international joint conference on Artificial Intelligence - Volume Volume One
The complexity of safe manipulation under scoring rules
IJCAI'11 Proceedings of the Twenty-Second international joint conference on Artificial Intelligence - Volume Volume One
Campaigns for lazy voters: truncated ballots
Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 2
Manipulation under voting rule uncertainty
Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 2
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence
Hi-index | 0.00 |
We resolve an open problem regarding the complexity of unweighted coalitional manipulation, namely, the complexity of Copelandα-manipulation for α ε {0, 1}. Copelandα, 0 ≤ α ≤ 1, is an election system where for each pair of candidates we check which one is preferred by more voters (i.e., we conduct a head-to-head majority contest) and we give one point to this candidate and zero to the other. However, in case of a tie both candidates receive α points. In the end, candidates with most points win. It is known [13] that Copelandα-manipulation is NP-complete for all rational α's in (0, 1) -- {0.5} (i.e., for all the reasonable cases except the three truly interesting ones). In this paper we show that the problem remains NP-complete for α ε {0, 1}. In addition, we resolve the complexity of Copelandα-manipulation for each rational α ε [0, 1] for the case of irrational voters.