IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1406.5120.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Strategy-proofness and single-peackedness in bounded distributive lattices

Author

Listed:
  • Ernesto Savaglio
  • Stefano Vannucci

Abstract

Two distinct specifications of single peakedness as currently met in the relevant literature are singled out and discussed. Then, it is shown that, under both of those specifications, a voting rule as defined on a bounded distributive lattice is strategy-proof on the set of all profiles of single peaked total preorders if and only if it can be represented as an iterated median of projections and constants, or equivalently as the behaviour of a certain median tree-automaton. The equivalence of individual and coalitional strategy-proofness that is known to hold for single peaked domains in bounded linear orders fails in such a general setting. A related impossibility result on anonymous coalitionally strategy-proof voting rules is also obtained.

Suggested Citation

  • Ernesto Savaglio & Stefano Vannucci, 2014. "Strategy-proofness and single-peackedness in bounded distributive lattices," Papers 1406.5120, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1406.5120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1406.5120
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barberà, Salvador & Berga, Dolors & Moreno, Bernardo, 2010. "Individual versus group strategy-proofness: When do they coincide?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(5), pages 1648-1674, September.
    2. Demange, Gabrielle, 1982. "Single-peaked orders on a tree," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 389-396, December.
    3. Bossert, Walter & Suzumura, Kotaro, 2010. "Consistency, Choice, and Rationality," Economics Books, Harvard University Press, number 9780674052994, Spring.
    4. Barbera, Salvador & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Zhou, Lin, 1991. "Voting by Committees," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 595-609, May.
    5. Chatterji, Shurojit & Sanver, Remzi & Sen, Arunava, 2013. "On domains that admit well-behaved strategy-proof social choice functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 1050-1073.
    6. Barbera, Salvador & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Zhou, Lin, 1991. "Voting by Committees," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 595-609, May.
    7. Danilov, Vladimir I., 1994. "The structure of non-manipulable social choice rules on a tree," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 123-131, April.
    8. Peters, Hans & van der Stel, Hans & Storcken, Ton, 1992. "Pareto Optimality, Anonymity, and Strategy-Proofness in Location Problems," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 21(3), pages 221-235.
    9. H. Moulin, 1980. "On strategy-proofness and single peakedness," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 437-455, January.
    10. Grandmont, Jean-Michel, 1978. "Intermediate Preferences and the Majority Rule," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(2), pages 317-330, March.
    11. Brown, Donald J & Ross, Stephen A, 1991. "Spanning, Valuation and Options," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 1(1), pages 3-12, January.
    12. Barbera Salvador & Gul Faruk & Stacchetti Ennio, 1993. "Generalized Median Voter Schemes and Committees," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 262-289, December.
    13. Michel Breton & Vera Zaporozhets, 2009. "On the equivalence of coalitional and individual strategy-proofness properties," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(2), pages 287-309, August.
    14. Kim C. Border & J. S. Jordan, 1983. "Straightforward Elections, Unanimity and Phantom Voters," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 50(1), pages 153-170.
    15. Bordes, G. & Laffond, G. & Le Breton, Michel, 2012. "Euclidean Preferences, Option Sets and Strategy Proofness," TSE Working Papers 12-302, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    16. Bordes, G. & Laffond, G. & Le Breton, Michel, 2012. "Euclidean Preferences, Option Sets and Strategy Proofness," IDEI Working Papers 717, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    17. G. Chichilnisky & G. M. Heal, 1997. "The geometry of implementation: a necessary and sufficient condition for straightforward games (*)," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 14(2), pages 259-294.
    18. Bossert, Walter & Sprumont, Yves, 2014. "Strategy-proof preference aggregation: Possibilities and characterizations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 109-126.
    19. Nehring, Klaus & Puppe, Clemens, 2007. "Efficient and strategy-proof voting rules: A characterization," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 132-153, April.
    20. Nehring, Klaus & Puppe, Clemens, 2007. "The structure of strategy-proof social choice -- Part I: General characterization and possibility results on median spaces," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 135(1), pages 269-305, July.
    21. Barbera, Salvador & Masso, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 1997. "Voting under Constraints," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 298-321, October.
    22. Schummer, James & Vohra, Rakesh V., 2002. "Strategy-proof Location on a Network," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 405-428, June.
    23. Stefano vannucci, 2012. "Unimodality and equivalence of simple and coalitional strategy-proofness in convex idempotent interval spaces," Department of Economics University of Siena 668, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    24. Monjardet, B., 1990. "Arrowian characterizations of latticial federation consensus functions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 51-71, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vannucci, Stefano, 2016. "Weakly unimodal domains, anti-exchange properties, and coalitional strategy-proofness of aggregation rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 56-67.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chatterji, Shurojit & Zeng, Huaxia, 2019. "Random mechanism design on multidimensional domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 25-105.
    2. Ernesto Savaglio & Stefano Vannucci, 2012. "Strategy-proofness and unimodality in bounded distributive lattices," Department of Economics University of Siena 642, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    3. Reffgen, Alexander, 2015. "Strategy-proof social choice on multiple and multi-dimensional single-peaked domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 349-383.
    4. Ernesto Savaglio & Stefano Vannucci, 2019. "Strategy-proof aggregation rules and single peakedness in bounded distributive lattices," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(2), pages 295-327, February.
    5. Chatterji, Shurojit & Sen, Arunava & Zeng, Huaxia, 2016. "A characterization of single-peaked preferences via random social choice functions," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(2), May.
    6. Bonifacio, Agustín G. & Massó, Jordi, 2020. "On strategy-proofness and semilattice single-peakedness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 219-238.
    7. Vannucci, Stefano, 2016. "Weakly unimodal domains, anti-exchange properties, and coalitional strategy-proofness of aggregation rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 56-67.
    8. Shurojit Chatterji & Huaxia Zeng, 2022. "A Taxonomy of Non-dictatorial Unidimensional Domains," Papers 2201.00496, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2022.
    9. Chatterji, Shurojit & Zeng, Huaxia, 2023. "A taxonomy of non-dictatorial unidimensional domains," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 228-269.
    10. Alcalde-Unzu, Jorge & Vorsatz, Marc, 2018. "Strategy-proof location of public facilities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 21-48.
    11. Chatterji, Shurojit & Sanver, Remzi & Sen, Arunava, 2013. "On domains that admit well-behaved strategy-proof social choice functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 1050-1073.
    12. Massó, Jordi & Moreno de Barreda, Inés, 2011. "On strategy-proofness and symmetric single-peakedness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 467-484, June.
    13. Nehring, Klaus & Puppe, Clemens, 2007. "Efficient and strategy-proof voting rules: A characterization," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 132-153, April.
    14. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/4ccevsvsdm96qpv5fgamlf1p1p is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Chatterji, Shurojit & Zeng, Huaxia, 2018. "On random social choice functions with the tops-only property," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 413-435.
    16. Sidartha Gordon, 2015. "Unanimity in attribute-based preference domains," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 13-29, January.
    17. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/4ccevsvsdm96qpv5fgamlf1p1p is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Madhuparna Karmokar & Souvik Roy & Ton Storcken, 2021. "Necessary and sufficient conditions for pairwise majority decisions on path-connected domains," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(3), pages 313-336, October.
    19. Jordi Massó & Shurojit Chatterji, 2015. "On Strategy-proofness and the Salience of Single-peakedness," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 952.15, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    20. Tobias Rachidi, 2020. "Optimal Voting Mechanisms on Generalized Single-Peaked Domains," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2020_214, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    21. Moulin, Hervé, 2017. "One dimensional mechanism design," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(2), May.
    22. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/4ccevsvsdm96qpv5fgamlf1p1p is not listed on IDEAS
    23. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4ccevsvsdm96qpv5fgamlf1p1p is not listed on IDEAS
    24. Bonifacio, Agustín G. & Massó, Jordi & Neme, Pablo, 2023. "Preference restrictions for simple and strategy-proof rules: Local and weakly single-peaked domains," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1406.5120. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.