Manipulative Elicitation -- A New Attack on Elections with Incomplete Preferences
Palash Dey

TL;DR
This paper reveals a new vulnerability in election manipulation called manipulative elicitation, where partial preference elicitation can be exploited to alter election outcomes, and shows that computing such manipulations is often polynomial-time solvable.
Contribution
It introduces manipulative elicitation as a novel attack in partial preferences and analyzes its computational complexity across various voting rules, highlighting a fundamental vulnerability.
Findings
Manipulative elicitation can change election winners using partial preferences.
Computationally, manipulative elicitation is polynomial-time solvable for many voting rules.
Adding minimum comparison constraints makes manipulative elicitation NP-complete.
Abstract
Lu and Boutilier proposed a novel approach based on "minimax regret" to use classical score based voting rules in the setting where preferences can be any partial (instead of complete) orders over the set of alternatives. We show here that such an approach is vulnerable to a new kind of manipulation which was not present in the classical (where preferences are complete orders) world of voting. We call this attack "manipulative elicitation." More specifically, it may be possible to (partially) elicit the preferences of the agents in a way that makes some distinguished alternative win the election who may not be a winner if we elicit every preference completely. More alarmingly, we show that the related computational task is polynomial time solvable for a large class of voting rules which includes all scoring rules, maximin, Copeland for every , simplified Bucklin…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Game Theory and Voting Systems · Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
