Abstract:The traditional axiomatic approach to voting is motivated by the problem of reconciling differences in subjective preferences. In contrast, a dominant line of work in the theory of voting over the past 15 years has considered a different kind of scenario, also fundamental to voting, in which there is a genuinely "best" outcome that voters would agree on if they only had enough information. This type of scenario has its roots in the classical Condorcet Jury Theorem; it includes cases such as jurors in a criminal trial who all want to reach the correct verdict but disagree in their inferences from the available evidence, or a corporate board of directors who all want to improve the company's revenue, but who have different information that favors different options. This style of voting leads to a natural set of questions: each voter has a {\em private signal} that provides probabilistic information about which option is best, and a central question is whether a simple plurality voting system, which tabulates votes for different options, can cause the group decision to arrive at the correct option. We show that plurality voting is powerful enough to achieve this: there is a way for voters to map their signals into votes for options in such a way that --- with sufficiently many voters --- the correct option receives the greatest number of votes with high probability. We show further, however, that any process for achieving this is inherently expensive in the number of voters it requires: succeeding in identifying the correct option with probability at least $1 - \eta$ requires $\Omega(n^3 \epsilon^{-2} \log \eta^{-1})$ voters, where $n$ is the number of options and $\epsilon$ is a distributional measure of the minimum difference between the options.

Are Weighted Games Sufficiently Good for Binary Voting?

Weighted Committee Games

Influence in Weighted Committees

Computation and Bribery of Voting Power in Delegative Simple Games

The Art and Beauty of Voting Power

Invariably Suboptimal - An attempt to improve the voting rules of Treaties of Nice and Lisbon

On influence and compromise in two-tier voting systems

Voting power and Qualified Majority Voting with a "no vote" option

Dimension of the Lisbon voting rules in the EU Council: a challenge and new world record

Effects of Vote Delegation in Blockchains: Who Wins?

Axiomatization of some power indices in voting games with abstention

Beyond Proportional Individual Guarantees for Binary Perpetual Voting

Analysis and optimization of weighted voting systems consisting of voting units with limited availability

Power Distribution in Randomized Weighted Voting: the Effects of the Quota

Voting with Limited Information and Many Alternatives

Margin of Victory for Weighted Tournament Solutions

How Many Representatives Do We Need? the Optimal Size of a Congress Voting on Binary Issues

Information design for weighted voting

An upper bound on the dimension of the voting system of the European Union Council under the Lisbon rules

Complexity Dichotomies for Unweighted Scoring Rules

Double Majority and Generalized Brexit: Explaining Counterintuitive Results