Vote elicitation: complexity and strategy-proofness

Preference elicitation is a central problem in AI, and has received significant attention in single-agent settings. It is also a key problem in multiagent systems, but has received little attention here so far. In this setting, the agents may have different preferences that often must be aggregated using voting. This leads to interesting issues because what, if any, information should be elicited from an agent depends on what other agents have revealed about their preferences so far. In this paper we study effective elicitation, and its impediments, for the most common voting protocols. It turns out that in the Single Transferable Vote protocol, even knowing when to terminate elicitation is <i>N P</i>-complete, while this is easy for all the other protocols under study. Even for these protocols, determining how to elicit effectively is <i>N P</i>-complete, even with perfect suspicions about how the agents will vote. The exception is the Plurality protocol where such effective elicitation is easy. We also show that elicitation introduces additional opportunities for strategic manipulation by the voters. We demonstrate how to curtail the space of elicitation schemes so that no such additional strategic issues arise.

[1]  Eithan Ephrati,et al.  Deriving Consensus in Multiagent Systems , 1996, Artif. Intell..

[2]  Peter Haddawy,et al.  Toward Case-Based Preference Elicitation: Similarity Measures on Preference Structures , 1998, UAI.

[3]  Trey Smith,et al.  Constructing and Clearing Combinatorial Exchanges Using Preference Elicitation , 2002 .

[4]  Jeffrey S. Rosenschein,et al.  A Non-manipulable Meeting Scheduling System , 1994 .

[5]  Michael P. Wellman,et al.  AkBA: a progressive, anonymous-price combinatorial auction , 2000, EC '00.

[6]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Partial-revelation VCG mechanism for combinatorial auctions , 2002, AAAI/IAAI.

[7]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  Games against nature , 1985, 24th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1983).

[8]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  Preference-Based Configuration of Web Page Content , 2001, IJCAI.

[9]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  An Implementation of the Contract Net Protocol Based on Marginal Cost Calculations , 1993, AAAI.

[10]  Eithan Ephrati,et al.  Multi-Agent Planning as a Dynamic Search for Social Consensus , 1993, IJCAI.

[11]  Eithan Ephrati,et al.  The Clarke Tax as a Consensus Mechanism Among Automated Agents , 1991, AAAI.

[12]  Michael P. Wellman A computational market model for distributed configuration design , 1994, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[13]  David C. Parkes,et al.  Preventing Strategic Manipulation in Iterative Auctions: Proxy Agents and Price-Adjustment , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[14]  John J. Bartholdi,et al.  Single transferable vote resists strategic voting , 2015 .

[15]  T. Sandholm,et al.  Preference Elicitation in Combinatorial Auctions (Extended Abstract) , 2001 .

[16]  David C. Parkes,et al.  Iterative Combinatorial Auctions: Theory and Practice , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[17]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Complexity of manipulating elections with few candidates , 2002, AAAI/IAAI.

[18]  Marek J. Druzdzel,et al.  Elicitation of Probabilities for Belief Networks: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Information , 1995, UAI.

[19]  Raimo P. Hämäläinen,et al.  Preference ratios in multiattribute evaluation (PRIME)-elicitation and decision procedures under incomplete information , 2001, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[20]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Bargaining with limited computation: Deliberation equilibrium , 2001, Artif. Intell..

[21]  Peter Haddawy,et al.  Problem-Focused Incremental Elicitation of Multi-Attribute Utility Models , 1997, UAI.

[22]  William P. Birmingham,et al.  Preference-directed design , 1995, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[23]  F. Ygge,et al.  Constructing Speculative Demand Functions in Equilibrium Markets , 1999 .

[24]  Eithan Ephrati,et al.  A heuristic technique for multi‐agent planning , 1997, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[25]  David C. Parkes,et al.  Optimal Auction Design for Agents with Hard Valuation Problems , 1999, Agent Mediated Electronic Commerce.

[26]  Daphne Koller,et al.  Making Rational Decisions Using Adaptive Utility Elicitation , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[27]  Craig Boutilier,et al.  A Constraint-Based Approach to Preference Elicitation and Decision Making , 1997 .

[28]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Differential -Revelation VCG Mechanisms for Combinatorial Auctions , 2002, AMEC.

[29]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Effectiveness of Preference Elicitation in Combinatorial Auctions , 2002, AMEC.

[30]  Murray Campbell,et al.  Evaluating multiple attribute items using queries , 2001, EC '01.

[31]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Preference elicitation in combinatorial auctions , 2001, AAMAS '02.