اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدWisdom of the Crowd Voting: Truthful Aggregation of Voter Information and Preferences
92
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
We consider two-alternative elections where voters preferences depend on a state variable that is not directly observable. Each voter receives a private signal that is correlated to the state variable. Voters may be contingent with different preferences in different states; or predetermined with the same preference in every state. In this setting, even if every voter is a contingent voter, agents voting according to their private information need not result in the adoption of the universally preferred alternative, because the signals can be systematically biased. We present an easy-to-deploy mechanism that elicits and aggregates the private signals from the voters, and outputs the alternative that is favored by the majority. In particular, voters truthfully reporting their signals forms a strong Bayes Nash equilibrium (where no coalition of voters can deviate and receive a better outcome).
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
It remains an open question how to determine the winner of an election given incomplete or uncertain voter preferences. One solution is to assume some probability space for the voting profile and declare the candidates having the best chance of winni
ng to be the (co-)winners. We refer to this as the Most Probable Winner (MPW). In this paper, we propose an alternative winner interpretation for positional scoring rules - the Most Expected Winner (MEW), based on the expected performance of the candidates. This winner interpretation enjoys some desirable properties that the MPW does not. We establish the theoretical hardness of MEW over incomplete voter preferences, then identify a collection of tractable cases for a variety of voting profiles. An important contribution of this work is to separate the voter preferences into the generation step and the observation step, which gives rise to a unified voting profile combining both incomplete and probabilistic voting profiles.
The average portfolio structure of institutional investors is shown to have properties which account for transaction costs in an optimal way. This implies that financial institutions unknowingly display collective rationality, or Wisdom of the Crowd.
Individual deviations from the rational benchmark are ample, which illustrates that system-wide rationality does not need nearly rational individuals. Finally we discuss the importance of accounting for constraints when assessing the presence of Wisdom of the Crowd.
Suppose a decision maker wants to predict weather tomorrow by eliciting and aggregating information from crowd. How can the decision maker incentivize the crowds to report their information truthfully? Many truthful peer prediction mechanisms have be
en proposed for homogeneous agents, whose types are drawn from the same distribution. However, in many situations, the population is a hybrid crowd of different types of agents with different forms of information, and the decision maker has neither the identity of any individual nor the proportion of each types of agents in the crowd. Ignoring the heterogeneity among the agent may lead to inefficient of biased information, which would in turn lead to suboptimal decisions. In this paper, we propose the first framework for information elicitation from hybrid crowds, and two mechanisms to motivate agents to report their information truthfully. The first mechanism combines two mechanisms via linear transformations and the second is based on mutual information. With two mechanisms, the decision maker can collect high quality information from hybrid crowds, and learns the expertise of agents.
We provide the first separation in the approximation guarantee achievable by truthful and non-truthful combinatorial auctions with polynomial communication. Specifically, we prove that any truthful mechanism guaranteeing a $(frac{3}{4}-frac{1}{240}+v
arepsilon)$-approximation for two buyers with XOS valuations over $m$ items requires $exp(Omega(varepsilon^2 cdot m))$ communication, whereas a non-truthful algorithm by Dobzinski and Schapira [SODA 2006] and Feige [2009] is already known to achieve a $frac{3}{4}$-approximation in $poly(m)$ communication. We obtain our separation by proving that any {simultaneous} protocol ({not} necessarily truthful) which guarantees a $(frac{3}{4}-frac{1}{240}+varepsilon)$-approximation requires communication $exp(Omega(varepsilon^2 cdot m))$. The taxation complexity framework of Dobzinski [FOCS 2016] extends this lower bound to all truthful mechanisms (including interactive truthful mechanisms).
Despite the prevalence of voting systems in the real world there is no consensus among researchers of how people vote strategically, even in simple voting settings. This paper addresses this gap by comparing different approaches that have been used t
o model strategic voting, including expected utility maximization, heuristic decisionmaking, and bounded rationality models. The models are applied to data collected from hundreds of people in controlled voting experiments, where people vote after observing non-binding poll information. We introduce a new voting model, the Attainability- Utility (AU) heuristic, which weighs the popularity of a candidate according to the poll, with the utility of the candidate to the voter. We argue that the AU model is cognitively plausible, and show that it is able to predict peoples voting behavior significantly better than other models from the literature. It was almost at par with (and sometimes better than) a machine learning algorithm that uses substantially more information. Our results provide new insights into the strategic considerations of voters, that undermine the prevalent assumptions of much theoretical work in social choice.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
