Impossibility and Other Alternative Voting Methods

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Chapter 10: The Manipulability of Voting Systems Lesson Plan
Advertisements

Which units are you most interested in covering? Unit A –Management Science Unit B – Growth Unit C – Shape and Form Unit D – Statistics.
Voting Methods Continued
Math 1010 ‘Mathematical Thought and Practice’ An active learning approach to a liberal arts mathematics course.
The Voting Problem: A Lesson in Multiagent System Based on Jose Vidal’s book Fundamentals of Multiagent Systems Henry Hexmoor SIUC.
Computational Democracy: Algorithms, Game Theory, and Elections Steven Wolfman 2011/10/27.
How “impossible” is it to design a Voting rule? Angelina Vidali University of Athens.
IMPOSSIBILITY AND MANIPULABILITY Section 9.3 and Chapter 10.
CS 886: Electronic Market Design Social Choice (Preference Aggregation) September 20.
Chapter 1: Methods of Voting
VOTING SYSTEMS Section 2.5.
Math for Liberal Studies.  We have studied the plurality and Condorcet methods so far  In this method, once again voters will be allowed to express.
Math for Liberal Studies.  In most US elections, voters can only cast a single ballot for the candidate he or she likes the best  However, most voters.
Social Choice: The Impossible Dream Michelle Blessing February 23, 2010 Michelle Blessing February 23, 2010.
Excursions in Modern Mathematics Sixth Edition
MAT 105 Spring  As we have discussed, when there are only two candidates in an election, deciding the winner is easy  May’s Theorem states that.
Chapter 9: Social Choice: The Impossible Dream Lesson Plan
Voting Review Material
Social choice theory = preference aggregation = voting assuming agents tell the truth about their preferences Tuomas Sandholm Professor Computer Science.
Social choice theory = preference aggregation = truthful voting Tuomas Sandholm Professor Computer Science Department Carnegie Mellon University.
How is this math? Mathematics is essentially the application of deductive reasoning to the study relations among patterns, structures, shapes, forms and.
Social choice (voting) Vincent Conitzer > > > >
Overview Aggregating preferences The Social Welfare function The Pareto Criterion The Compensation Principle.
MAT 105 Spring  We have studied the plurality and Condorcet methods so far  In this method, once again voters will be allowed to express their.
Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem
Arrow’s Theorem The search for the perfect election decision procedure.
CPS Voting and social choice Vincent Conitzer
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 15 Section 2 - Slide Election Theory Flaws of Voting.
Chapter 10: The Manipulability of Voting Systems Lesson Plan An Introduction to Manipulability Majority Rule and Condorcet’s Method The Manipulability.
Chapter 15 Section 1 - Slide 1 Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. AND.
Math for Liberal Studies.  We have seen many methods, all of them flawed in some way  Which method should we use?  Maybe we shouldn’t use any of them,
Great Theoretical Ideas in Computer Science.
Let’s take a class vote. How many of you are registered to vote?
Voting Methods Examples of Voting Methods (other than majority rules) –Plurality –Borda Count –Hare System –Sequential Pairwise –Approval Voting.
Part 4: Voting Topics - Continued
Social choice theory = preference aggregation = voting assuming agents tell the truth about their preferences Tuomas Sandholm Professor Computer Science.
Fairness Criteria and Arrow’s Theorem Section 1.4 Animation.
Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem. Question: Is there a public decision making process, voting method, or “Social Welfare Function” (SWF) that will tell us.
Copyright 2013, 2010, 2007, Pearson, Education, Inc. Section 15.2 Flaws of Voting.
The mathematics of voting The paradoxes of democracy.
Chapter 9: Social Choice: The Impossible Dream Lesson Plan Voting and Social Choice Majority Rule and Condorcet’s Method Other Voting Systems for Three.
Excursions in Modern Mathematics, 7e: 1.Conclusion - 2Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. 1 The Mathematics of Voting CONCLUSION Elections, Fairness,
Voting System Review Borda – Sequential Run-Off – Run-Off –
My guy lost? What’s up with that….  In the 1950’s, Kenneth Arrow, a mathematical economist, proved that a method for determining election results that.
Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem
Condorcet Method Another group-ranking method. Development of Condorcet Method  As we have seen, different methods of determining a group ranking often.
Choosing the Lesser Evil: Helping Students Understand Voting Systems
Impossibility and Other Alternative Voting Methods
1.
Chapter 9: Social Choice: The Impossible Dream Lesson Plan
Chapter 10: The Manipulability of Voting Systems Lesson Plan
Social choice theory = preference aggregation = voting assuming agents tell the truth about their preferences Tuomas Sandholm Professor Computer Science.
Chapter 9: Social Choice: The Impossible Dream Lesson Plan
Applied Mechanism Design For Social Good
8.2 Voting Possibilities and Fairness Criteria
Introduction If we assume
Chapter 9: Social Choice: The Impossible Dream Lesson Plan
1.3 The Borda Count Method.
Elections with More Than Two Candidates
Alex Tabarrok Arrow’s Theorem.
Warm Up – 5/27 - Monday How many people voted in the election?
Section 15.2 Flaws of Voting
5-2 Election Theory Flaws of Voting.
Voting systems Chi-Kwong Li.
Voting and social choice
Quiz – 1/24 - Friday How many people voted in the election?
Flaws of the Voting Methods
CPS Voting and social choice
Arrow’s Conditions and Approval Voting
Chapter 9: Social Choice: The Impossible Dream Lesson Plan
Presentation transcript:

Impossibility and Other Alternative Voting Methods MAT 105 Fall 2008 Impossibility and Other Alternative Voting Methods

Which Method to Use? We have seen many methods, all of them flawed in some way Which method should we use? Maybe we shouldn’t use any of them, and keep searching for a better way

Arrow’s Theorem In 1951, Kenneth Arrow proved that this search will be in vain Specifically, he proved that there is no voting system that satisfies all of the following conditions: is not a dictatorship voters rank their candidates in order independence of irrelevant alternatives Pareto condition

Getting Around Arrow’s Theorem Instead of giving up hope, we might look for ways around Arrow’s Theorem Since we know we can’t have a voting method with all of those conditions being true, we might look for one condition to drop We certainly don’t want a dictatorship or a method that doesn’t satisfy the Pareto condition If we drop IIA, we could use Borda Count

Dropping Preference Orders If we drop the preference order condition, we have two options: allow voters to express less information allow voters to express more information These choices lead to approval voting and range voting, respectively

Approval Voting Voters cast a single vote for each candidate they approve of The candidate who receives more votes than any other is the winner

Properties of Approval Voting We can assume that voters are still using (mental) preference lists, but simply have a “cutoff” above which they approve of a candidate and below which they do not For example, suppose we have two voters both with preference A>B>C>D One of these voters might approve of A, B, and C, and the other might approve only of A

Approval Conditions Voters Preference Order 1 A > B > C B > A > C C > A > B Approval voting does not satisfy the Condorcet winner criterion Consider the profile shown here, where red indicates that the voter approves of the candidate A is the Condorcet winner, but B wins the approval vote

Range Voting Voters rate each candidate on a scale Examples scale from 0 to 10 1 star to 5 stars -2 to 2 thumbs The candidate with the most points wins

Properties of Range Voting Again we assume that voters are using an internal ranking to cast votes If a voter likes A more than B, they will give A at least as many points as they give B However, there are lots of possibilities for how a voter with preference A>B>C>D could fill out a ballot

Range Conditions Range voting satisfies the Pareto condition If every voter prefers A over B, then every ballot will give A at least as many points as B, so A’s total will be at least B’s total The only way this could make B win is if every single voter gave A the same score as B, and A and B tied for the win

Range Conditions In fact, range voting satisfies many important conditions (though notably not Condorcet winner) Range voting appears to be the closest to “fair” that we may be able to get