Practical voting rules with partial information

Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 151-182

  Kalech, Meir ^a   Kraus, Sarit ^b   Kaminka, Gal A ^b   Goldman, Claudia V ^c  

^a BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

^b BAR ILAN UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^c Samsung Telecom Research Israel   (Israel)

Author keywords

Computational social choice; Multi agent systems; Voting

Indexed keywords

APPROXIMATION ALGORITHMS; HEURISTIC ALGORITHMS; ITERATIVE METHODS;

CLOSE APPROXIMATION; COMPUTATIONAL SOCIAL CHOICES; GREEDY HEURISTICS; ITERATIVE ALGORITHM; JOINT DECISIONS; MULTIPLE AGENTS; PARTIAL INFORMATION; VOTING;

MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS;

EID: 78651247735     PISSN: 13872532     EISSN: 15737454     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10458-010-9133-6     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Blosser, G., & Zhan, J. (2008). Privacy-preserving collaborative e-voting. In Intelligence and security informatics (pp. 508-513). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
2. Conitzer, V., & Sandholm, T. (2002). Vote elicitation: Complexity and strategy-proofness. In Eighteenth national conference on artificial intelligence, pp. 392-397.
3. Conitzer, V., & Sandholm, T. (2005). Communication complexity of common voting rules. In EC '05: Proceedings of the 6th ACM conference on electronic commerce, pp. 78-87.
4. Faltings B., Macho-Gonzalez S. (2005) Open constraint programming. Artifitial Intelligence 161(1-2): 181-208.
5. Gelain, M., Pini, M. S., Rossi, F., & Venable, K. B. (2007) Dealing with incomplete preferences in soft constraint problems. In The 13th international conference on principles and practice of constraint prgramming (CP-07), pp. 286-300.
6. Hudson, B., & Sandholm, T. (2003). Generalizing preference elicitation in combinatorial auctions. In Proceedings of the second international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS), pp. 1014-1015.
7. Konczak, K. (2006). Voting theory in answer set programming. In The 20th workshop on logic programming (WLP-06), pp. 45-53.
8. Konczak, K., & Lang, J. (2005). Voting procedures with incomplete preferences. In Proceedings of multidisciplinary IJCAI'05 workshop on advances in preference handling, Edinburg, Scotland.
9. Lang, J., Pini, M. S., Rossi, F., Venable, K. B., & Walsh, T. (2007). Winner determination in sequential majority voting. In Proceedings of the international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 1372-1377.
10. Netflix prize: http://www. netflixprize. com.
11. Pini, M. S., Rossi, F., Venable, K. B., & Walsh, T. (2007). Incompleteness and incomparability in preference aggregation. In M. M. Veloso (Ed.), In Proceedings of the international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 1464-1469.
12. Pini M. S., Rossi F., Venable K. B., Walsh T. (2009) Aggregating partially ordered preferences. Journal of Logic and Computation 19(3): 475-502.
13. Pitt J., Kamara L., Sergot M., Artikis A. (2006) Voting in multi-agent systems. Computer Journal 49(2): 156-170.
14. Tambe, M., Bowring, E., Pearce, J. P., Varakantham, P., Scerri, P., & Pynadath, D. V. (2006). Electric elves: What went wrong and why. In Proceedings of the AAAI spring symposium on what went wrong and why: Lessons from AI research and applications.
15. Walsh, T. (2007). Uncertainty in preference elicitation and aggregation. In Proceedings of the 22nd national conference on Artificial intelligence (AAAI-07), pp. 3-8.
16. Walsh, T. (2008). Complexity of terminating preference elicitation. In Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS), pp. 967-974.
17. Xia, L., & Conitzer, V. (2008) Determining possible and necessary winners under common voting rules given partial orders. In Proceedings of the 23rd national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI-08), pp. 196-201.
18. Zhan J., Matwin S., Chang L.-W. (2004) Privacy-preserving electronic voting. Information & Security: An International Journal 15(2): 165-180.