Uncertainty in preference elicitation and aggregation

Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Volumn 1, Issue , 2007, Pages 3-8

  Walsh, Toby ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS;

PREFERENCE AGGREGATION; VOTING;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

EID: 36348984460     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. Bartholdi, J., and Orlin, J. 1991. Single transferable vote resists strategic voting. Social Choice and Welfare 8(4):341-354.
2. Bartholdi, J.; Tovey, C.; and Trick, M. 1989. The computational difficulty of manipulating and election. Social Choice and Welfare 6(3):227-241.
3. Black, D. 1948. On the rationale of group decision-making. Journal of Political Economy 56(1):23-34.
4. Boutilier, C. 2002. A POMDP formulation of preference elicitation problems. In Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on AI, 239-246. American Association for Artificial Intelligence.
5. Conitzer, V., and Sandholm, T. 2002a. Complexity of manipulating elections with few candidates. In Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on AI. American Association for Artificial Intelligence.
6. Conitzer, V., and Sandholm, T. 2002b. Vote elicitation: Complexity and strategy-proofness. In Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on AI. American Association for Artificial Intelligence.
7. Conitzer, V.; Lang, J.; and Sandholm, T. 2003. How many candidates are needed to make elections hard to manipulate. In Proceedings of the Conference on Theoretical aspects of reasoning about Knowledge.
8. Conitzer, V. 2006. Computational Aspects of Preference Aggregation. Ph.D. Dissertation, Computer Science Department, Carnegie Mellon University.
9. Conitzer, V. 2007. Eliciting single-peaked preferences using comparison queries. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.
10. Gajdos, T.; Hayashi, T.; Talion, J.; and Vergnaud, J. 2006. On the impossibility of preference aggregation under uncertainty. Working Paper, Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne, Universite Paris 1-Pantheon-Sorbonne.
11. Konczak, K., and Lang, J. 2005. Voting procedures with incomplete preferences. In Proceedings of the IJCAI-2005 workshop on Advances in Preference Handling.
12. Lacy, D., and Niou, E. 2000. A problem with referenda. Journal of Theoretical Politics 12(1):5-31.
13. Lang, J.; Pini, M.; Rossi, F.; Venable, B.; and Walsh, T. 2007. Winner determination in sequential majority voting. In Proceedings of 20th IJCAI. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
14. Pini, M.; Rossi, F.; Venable, B.; and Walsh, T. 2007. Incompleteness and incomparability in preference aggregation. In Proceedings of 20th IJCAI. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.