Abstract:The Coalitional Manipulation problem has been studied extensively in the literature for many voting rules. However, most studies have focused on the complete information setting, wherein the manipulators know the votes of the non-manipulators. While this assumption is reasonable for purposes of showing intractability, it is unrealistic for algorithmic considerations. In most real-world scenarios, it is impractical to assume that the manipulators to have accurate knowledge of all the other votes. In this work, we investigate manipulation with incomplete information. In our framework, the manipulators know a partial order for each voter that is consistent with the true preference of that voter. In this setting, we formulate three natural computational notions of manipulation, namely weak, opportunistic, and strong manipulation. We say that an extension of a partial order is viable if there exists a manipulative vote for that extension. We propose the following notions of manipulation when manipulators have incomplete information about the votes of other voters. 1. Weak Manipulation: the manipulators seek to vote in a way that makes their preferred candidate win in at least one extension of the partial votes of the non-manipulators. 2. Opportunistic Manipulation: the manipulators seek to vote in a way that makes their preferred candidate win in every viable extension of the partial votes of the non-manipulators. 3. Strong Manipulation: the manipulators seek to vote in a way that makes their preferred candidate win in every extension of the partial votes of the non-manipulators. We consider several scenarios for which the traditional manipulation problems are easy (for instance, Borda with a single manipulator). For many of them, the corresponding manipulative questions that we propose turn out to be computationally intractable. Our hardness results often hold even when very little information is missing, or in other words, even when the instances are very close to the complete information setting. Our results show that the impact of paucity of information on the computational complexity of manipulation crucially depends on the notion of manipulation under consideration. Our overall conclusion is that computational hardness continues to be a valid obstruction to manipulation, in the context of a more realistic model.

Complexity of Manipulation, Bribery, and Campaign Management in Bucklin and Fallback Voting

Control Complexity in Bucklin, Fallback, and Plurality Voting: An Experimental Approach

The Complexity of Manipulating $k$-Approval Elections

Complexity of Conformant Election Manipulation

Manipulation is Harder with Incomplete Votes

Complexity of manipulation with partial information in voting

Is computational complexity a barrier to manipulation?

Complexity of and Algorithms for Borda Manipulation

How Hard Is Bribery in Elections?

Complexity of Manipulating and Controlling Approval-Based Multiwinner Voting

Local Distance Constrained Bribery in Voting

Using Weighted Matching to Solve 2-Approval/Veto Control and Bribery

On the Complexity of Destructive Bribery in Approval-Based Multi-winner Voting

Manipulability of Single Transferable Vote

An Empirical Study of the Manipulability of Single Transferable Voting

Learning to Manipulate under Limited Information

New Complexity Results on Coalitional Manipulation of Borda

Often harder than in the Constructive Case: Destructive Bribery in CP-nets

The Complexity of Online Bribery in Sequential Elections

Complexity Dichotomies for Unweighted Scoring Rules

Election Manipulation in Social Networks with Single-Peaked Agents