Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorBhattacharyya, Arnab
dc.contributor.authorMathur, Anurita
dc.date.accessioned2025-10-30T10:57:33Z
dc.date.available2025-10-30T10:57:33Z
dc.date.submitted2017
dc.identifier.urihttps://etd.iisc.ac.in/handle/2005/7274
dc.description.abstractThrough the course of history, a variety of voting rules have been used to determine election outcomes. The traditional way in social choice theory to evaluate a voting rule is by checking whether it satisfies axioms deemed to be desirable for voting rules. Celebrated results in social choice theory say that even for a small set of seemingly necessary axioms, no voting rule exists satisfying them. In the face of such impossibility results, it becomes challenging to justify why certain voting rules work well in practice. Although in theory, these rules may yield drastically different outcomes, for real-world datasets, behavioural social choice analyses have found that the rules are often in perfect agreement with each other! This work attempts to give a mathematical explanation of this phenomenon. In this work, we formulate a quantitative approach towards comparing voting rules by viewing them as two players engaged in a zero-sum game. If rule A selects candidate C? while rule B selects candidate C?, the payoff for A is the number of voters who prefer C? to C? minus the number who prefer C? to C?. The optimal voting rule according to this criterion (corresponding to the optimal randomized strategy for the game) is the game-theoretic rule (GT) [RS10], while the best deterministic strategy is the well-known Minimax voting rule. We investigate rigorously how various common voting rules fare against each other in terms of the minimum payoff they receive for arbitrary voting profiles. We also study the case when the voting profiles are drawn from a mixture of multinomial logit distributions. This scenario corresponds to a population consisting of a small number of groups, each voting according to a latent preference ranking. We supplement the theoretical findings by empirically comparing the payoff of voting rules when they are applied to user preferences for movies as determined from the Netflix competition dataset [BL07]. On this dataset, we find that the Minimax rule, the Schulze rule, and a deterministic variant of the GT rule perform the best in our framework.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesT09479
dc.rightsI grant Indian Institute of Science the right to archive and to make available my thesis or dissertation in whole or in part in all forms of media, now hereafter known. I retain all proprietary rights, such as patent rights. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis or dissertation
dc.subjectSocial Choice Theory
dc.subjectGame-Theoretic Analysis
dc.subjectMultinomial Logit Model
dc.titleGap between outcomes of voting rules
dc.degree.nameMSc Engg
dc.degree.levelMasters
dc.degree.grantorIndian Institute of Science
dc.degree.disciplineEngineering


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record