Author name cluster

Patrick Lederer

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

17 papers

1 author row

AAMAS Conference 2026 Conference Paper

Majoritarian Assignment Rules

Felix Brandt
Haoyuan Chen
Chris Dong
Patrick Lederer
Alexander Schlenga

A central problem in multiagent systems is the fair assignment of objects to agents. In this paper, we initiate the analysis of classic majoritarian social choice functions in assignment. Exploiting the special structure of the assignment domain, we show a number of surprising results with no counterparts in general social choice. In particular, we establish a near one-to-one correspondence between preference profiles and majority graphs. This correspondence implies that key properties of assignments—such as Pareto-optimality, least unpopularity, and mixed popularity—can be determined solely by the associated majority graph. We further show that all Paretooptimal assignments are semi-popular and belong to the top cycle. Elements of the top cycle can thus easily be found via serial dictatorships. Our main result is a complete characterization of the top cycle, which implies the top cycle can only consist of one, two, all but two, all but one, or all assignments. By contrast, we find that the uncovered set contains only very few assignments.

PDF

AIJ Journal 2026 Journal Article

Settling the score: Portioning with cardinal preferences

Edith Elkind
Matthias Greger
Patrick Lederer
Warut Suksompong
Nicholas Teh

We study a portioning setting in which a public resource such as time or money is to be divided among a given set of candidates, and each agent proposes a division of the resource. We consider two families of aggregation rules for this setting -- those based on coordinate-wise aggregation and those that optimize some notion of welfare -- as well as the recently proposed independent markets rule. We provide a detailed analysis of these rules from an axiomatic perspective, both for classic axioms, such as strategyproofness and Pareto optimality, and for novel axioms, some of which aim to capture proportionality in this setting. Our results indicate that a simple rule that computes the average of the proposals satisfies many of our axioms and fares better than all other considered rules in terms of fairness properties. We complement these results by presenting two characterizations of the average rule.

Details DOI

AAMAS Conference 2026 Conference Paper

The Impossibility of Strategyproof Rank Aggregation

Manuel Eberl
Patrick Lederer

In rank aggregation, the goal is to combine multiple input rankings into a single output ranking. In this paper, we analyze rank aggregation methods, so-called social welfare functions (SWFs), with respect to strategyproofness, which requires that no agent can misreport his ranking to obtain an output ranking that is closer to his true ranking in terms of the Kemeny distance. As our main result, we show that no anonymous SWF satisfies unanimity and strategyproofness when there are at least four alternatives. This result is proven by SAT solving, a computer-aided theorem proving technique, and verified by Isabelle, a highly trustworthy interactive proof assistant. Further, we prove by hand that strategyproofness is incompatible with majority consistency, a variant of Condorcetconsistency for SWFs. Lastly, we show that all SWFs in two natural classes have a large incentive ratio and are thus highly manipulable.

PDF

IJCAI Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Distance Preservation Games

Haris Aziz
Hau Chan
Patrick Lederer
Shivika Narang
Toby Walsh

We introduce and analyze distance preservation games (DPGs). In DPGs, agents express ideal distances to other agents and need to choose locations in the unit interval while preserving their ideal distances as closely as possible. We analyze the existence and computation of location profiles that are jump stable (i. e. , no agent can benefit by moving to another location) or welfare optimal for DPGs, respectively. Specifically, we prove that there are DPGs without jump stable location profiles and identify important cases where such outcomes always exist and can be computed efficiently. Similarly, we show that finding welfare optimal location profiles is NP-complete and present approximation algorithms for finding solutions with social welfare close to optimal. Finally, we prove that DPGs have a price of anarchy of at most 2.

PDF Details DOI

AAMAS Conference 2025 Conference Paper

The Metric Distortion of Randomized Social Choice Functions: C1 Maximal Lottery Rules and Simulations

Fabian Frank
Patrick Lederer

The metric distortion of a randomized social choice function (RSCF) quantifies its worst-case approximation ratio to the optimal social cost when the voters’ costs for alternatives are given by distances in a metric space. This notion has recently attracted significant attention as numerous RSCFs that aim to minimize the metric distortion have been suggested. Since such tailored voting rules have, however, little normative appeal other than their low metric distortion, we will study the metric distortion of well-established RSCFs. Specifically, we first show that C1 maximal lottery rules, a well-known class of RSCFs, have a metric distortion of 4, which is optimal within the class of majoritarian RSCFs. Secondly, we conduct extensive computer experiments on the metric distortion of RSCFs to obtain insights into their average-case performance. These computer experiments are based on a new linear program for computing the metric distortion of a lottery and reveal that the average-case metric distortion of some classical RSCFs is often only slightly worse than that of RSCFs tailored to minimize the metric distortion. Finally, we also analytically study the expected metric distortion of RSCFs for the impartial culture distribution. Specifically, we show that, under this distribution, every reasonable RSCF has an expected metric distortion close to 2 when the number of voters is large.

PDF

AAAI Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Weak Strategyproofness in Randomized Social Choice

Felix Brandt
Patrick Lederer

An important - but very demanding - property in collective decision-making is strategyproofness, which requires that voters cannot benefit from submitting insincere preferences. Gibbard (1977) has shown that only rather unattractive rules are strategyproof, even when allowing for randomization. However, Gibbard's theorem is based on a rather strong interpretation of strategyproofness, which deems a manipulation successful if it increases the voter's expected utility for at least one utility function consistent with his ordinal preferences. In this paper, we study weak strategyproofness, which deems a manipulation successful if it increases the voter's expected utility for all utility functions consistent with his ordinal preferences. We show how to systematically design attractive, weakly strategyproof social decision schemes (SDSs) and explore their limitations for both strict and weak preferences. In particular, for strict preferences, we show that there are weakly strategyproof SDSs that are either ex post efficient or Condorcet-consistent, while neither even-chance SDSs nor pairwise SDSs satisfy both properties and weak strategyproofness at the same time. By contrast, for the case of weak preferences, we discuss two sweeping impossibility results that preclude the existence of appealing weakly strategyproof SDSs.

PDF Details DOI

AAAI Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Participation Incentives in Approval-Based Committee Elections

Martin Bullinger
Chris Dong
Patrick Lederer
Clara Mehler

In approval-based committee (ABC) voting, the goal is to choose a subset of predefined size of the candidates based on the voters’ approval preferences over the candidates. While this problem has attracted significant attention in recent years, the incentives for voters to participate in an election for a given ABC voting rule have been neglected so far. This paper is thus the first to explicitly study this property, typically called participation, for ABC voting rules. In particular, we show that all ABC scoring rules even satisfy group participation, whereas most sequential rules severely fail participation. We furthermore explore several escape routes to the impossibility for sequential ABC voting rules: we prove for many sequential rules that (i) they satisfy participation on laminar profiles, (ii) voters who approve none of the elected candidates cannot benefit by abstaining, and (iii) it is NP-hard for a voter to decide whether she benefits from abstaining

PDF Details DOI

AAAI Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Refined Characterizations of Approval-Based Committee Scoring Rules

Chris Dong
Patrick Lederer

In approval-based committee (ABC) elections, the goal is to select a fixed-size subset of the candidates, a so-called committee, based on the voters' approval ballots over the candidates. One of the most popular classes of ABC voting rules are ABC scoring rules, for which voters give points to each committee and the committees with maximal total points are chosen. While the set of ABC scoring rules has recently been characterized in a model where the output is a ranking of all committees, no full characterization of these rules exists in the standard model where a set of winning committees is returned. We address this issue by characterizing two important subclasses of ABC scoring rules in the standard ABC election model, thereby both extending the result for ABC ranking rules to the standard setting and refining it to subclasses. In more detail, by relying on a consistency axiom for variable electorates, we characterize (i) the prominent class of Thiele rules and (ii) a new class of ABC voting rules called ballot size weighted approval voting. Based on these theorems, we also infer characterizations of three well-known ABC voting rules, namely multi-winner approval voting, proportional approval voting, and satisfaction approval voting.

PDF Details DOI

AAMAS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Characterizations of Sequential Valuation Rules

Chris Dong
Patrick Lederer

Approval-based committee (ABC) voting rules elect a fixed size subset of the candidates, a so-called committee, based on the voters’ approval ballots over the candidates. While these rules have recently attracted significant attention, axiomatic characterizations are largely missing so far. We address this problem by characterizing ABC voting rules within the broad and intuitive class of sequential valuation rules. These rules compute the winning committees by sequentially adding candidates that increase the score of the chosen committee the most. In more detail, we first characterize almost the full class of sequential valuation rules based on mild standard conditions and a new axiom called consistent committee monotonicity. This axiom postulates that the winning committees of size 𝑘 can be derived from those of size 𝑘 − 1 by only adding candidates and that these new candidates are chosen consistently. By requiring additional conditions, we derive from this result also a characterization of the prominent class of sequential Thiele rules. Finally, we refine our results to characterize three well-known ABC voting rules, namely sequential approval voting, sequential proportional approval voting, and sequential Chamberlin-Courant approval voting.

PDF

AAMAS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Strategyproof Social Decision Schemes on Super Condorcet Domains

Felix Brandt
Patrick Lederer
Sascha Tausch

One of the central economic paradigms in multi-agent systems is that agents should not be better off by acting dishonestly. In the context of collective decision-making, this axiom is known as strategyproofness and turns out to be rather prohibitive, even when allowing for randomization. In particular, Gibbard’s random dictatorship theorem shows that only rather unattractive social decision schemes (SDSs) satisfy strategyproofness on the full domain of preferences. In this paper, we obtain more positive results by investigating strategyproof SDSs on the Condorcet domain, which consists of all preference profiles that admit a Condorcet winner. In more detail, we show that, if the number of voters 𝑛 is odd, every strategyproof and non-imposing SDS on the Condorcet domain can be represented as a mixture of dictatorial SDSs and the Condorcet rule (which chooses the Condorcet winner with probability 1). Moreover, we prove that the Condorcet domain is a maximal connected domain that allows for attractive strategyproof SDSs if 𝑛 is odd as only random dictatorships are strategyproof and nonimposing on any sufficiently connected superset of it. We also derive analogous results for even 𝑛 by slightly extending the Condorcet domain. Finally, we also characterize the set of group-strategyproof and non-imposing SDSs on the Condorcet domain and its supersets. These characterizations strengthen Gibbard’s random dictatorship theorem and establish that the Condorcet domain is essentially a maximal domain that allows for attractive strategyproof SDSs.

PDF

AAAI Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Strategyproofness and Proportionality in Party-Approval Multiwinner Elections

Théo Delemazure
Tom Demeulemeester
Manuel Eberl
Jonas Israel
Patrick Lederer

In party-approval multiwinner elections the goal is to allocate the seats of a fixed-size committee to parties based on the approval ballots of the voters over the parties. In particular, each voter can approve multiple parties and each party can be assigned multiple seats. Two central requirements in this setting are proportional representation and strategyproofness. Intuitively, proportional representation requires that every sufficiently large group of voters with similar preferences is represented in the committee. Strategyproofness demands that no voter can benefit by misreporting her true preferences. We show that these two axioms are incompatible for anonymous party-approval multiwinner voting rules, thus proving a far-reaching impossibility theorem. The proof of this result is obtained by formulating the problem in propositional logic and then letting a SAT solver show that the formula is unsatisfiable. Additionally, we demonstrate how to circumvent this impossibility by considering a weakening of strategyproofness which requires that only voters who do not approve any elected party cannot manipulate. While most common voting rules fail even this weak notion of strategyproofness, we characterize Chamberlin-Courant approval voting within the class of Thiele rules based on this strategyproofness notion.

PDF Details DOI

IJCAI Conference 2022 Conference Paper

Incentives in Social Decision Schemes with Pairwise Comparison Preferences

Felix Brandt
Patrick Lederer
Warut Suksompong

Social decision schemes (SDSs) map the preferences of individual voters over multiple alternatives to a probability distribution over the alternatives. In order to study properties such as efficiency, strategyproofness, and participation for SDSs, preferences over alternatives are typically lifted to preferences over lotteries using the notion of stochastic dominance (SD). However, requiring strategyproofness or strict participation with respect to this preference extension only leaves room for rather undesirable SDSs such as random dictatorships. Hence, we focus on the natural but little understood pairwise comparison (PC) preference extension, which postulates that one lottery is preferred to another if the former is more likely to return a preferred outcome. In particular, we settle three open questions raised by Brandt in Rolling the dice: Recent results in probabilistic social choice (2017): (i) there is no Condorcet-consistent SDS that satisfies PC-strategyproofness; (ii) there is no anonymous and neutral SDS that satisfies PC-efficiency and PC-strategyproofness; and (iii) there is no anonymous and neutral SDS that satisfies PC-efficiency and strict PC-participation. All three impossibilities require m>=4 alternatives and turn into possibilities when m<=3.

PDF Details DOI

JAIR Journal 2022 Journal Article

On the Indecisiveness of Kelly-Strategyproof Social Choice Functions

Felix Brandt
Martin Bullinger
Patrick Lederer

Social choice functions (SCFs) map the preferences of a group of agents over some set of alternatives to a non-empty subset of alternatives. The Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem has shown that only extremely restrictive SCFs are strategyproof when there are more than two alternatives. For set-valued SCFs, or so-called social choice correspondences, the situation is less clear. There are miscellaneous -- mostly negative -- results using a variety of strategyproofness notions and additional requirements. The simple and intuitive notion of Kelly-strategyproofness has turned out to be particularly compelling because it is weak enough to still allow for positive results. For example, the Pareto rule is strategyproof even when preferences are weak, and a number of attractive SCFs (such as the top cycle, the uncovered set, and the essential set) are strategyproof for strict preferences. In this paper, we show that, for weak preferences, only indecisive SCFs can satisfy strategyproofness. In particular, (i) every strategyproof rank-based SCF violates Pareto-optimality, (ii) every strategyproof support-based SCF (which generalize Fishburn's C2 SCFs) that satisfies Pareto-optimality returns at least one most preferred alternative of every voter, and (iii) every strategyproof non-imposing SCF returns the Condorcet loser in at least one profile. We also discuss the consequences of these results for randomized social choice.

PDF Details DOI

AAMAS Conference 2022 Conference Paper

Relaxed Notions of Condorcet-Consistency and Efficiency for Strategyproof Social Decision Schemes

Felix Brandt
Patrick Lederer
René Romen

Social decision schemes (SDSs) map the preferences of a group of voters over some set of 𝑚 alternatives to a probability distribution over the alternatives. A seminal characterization of strategyproof SDSs by Gibbard implies that there are no strategyproof Condorcet extensions and that only random dictatorships satisfy ex post efficiency and strategyproofness. The latter is known as the random dictatorship theorem. We relax Condorcet-consistency and ex post efficiency by introducing a lower bound on the probability of Condorcet winners and an upper bound on the probability of Pareto-dominated alternatives, respectively. We then show that the SDS that assigns probabilities proportional to Copeland scores is the only anonymous, neutral, and strategyproof SDS that can guarantee the Condorcet winner a probability of at least 2/𝑚. Moreover, no strategyproof SDS can exceed this bound, even when dropping anonymity and neutrality. Secondly, we prove a continuous strengthening of Gibbard’s random dictatorship theorem: the less probability we put on Pareto-dominated alternatives, the closer to a random dictatorship is the resulting SDS. Finally, we show that the only anonymous, neutral, and strategyproof SDSs that maximize the probability of Condorcet winners while minimizing the probability of Pareto-dominated alternatives are mixtures of the uniform random dictatorship and the randomized Copeland rule.

PDF

AAMAS Conference 2021 Conference Paper

Non-manipulability in Set-valued and Probabilistic Social Choice Theory

Patrick Lederer

A fundamental requirement in social choice theory is non-manipulability, i. e. , voters should not be able to benefit by voting dishonestly. Unfortunately, a seminal result by Gibbard [12] and Satterthwaite [15] states that only extremely unattractive voting rules can be strategyproof if it is required to choose a single winner deterministically. Two common approaches for circumventing this impossibility are to allow for sets of winners and to allow for randomization. It is for both approaches possible to define various strategyproofness notions based on different assumptions on how voters compare sets of alternatives or lotteries on alternatives, and consequently, both positive and negative results can be obtained. The goal of this PhD project is to analyze for both models the boundary between possibility and impossibility results for various strategyproofness notions.

PDF

AAMAS Conference 2021 Conference Paper

On the Indecisiveness of Kelly-Strategyproof Social Choice Functions

Felix Brandt
Martin Bullinger
Patrick Lederer

Social choice functions (SCFs) map the preferences of a group of agents over some set of alternatives to a non-empty subset of alternatives. The Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem has shown that only extremely unattractive single-valued SCFs are strategyproof when there are more than two alternatives. For set-valued SCFs, or so-called social choice correspondences, the situation is less clear. There are miscellaneous—mostly negative—results using a variety of strategyproofness notions and additional requirements. The simple and intuitive notion of Kelly-strategyproofness has turned out to be particularly compelling because it is weak enough to still allow for positive results. For example, the Pareto rule is strategyproof even when preferences are weak, and a number of attractive SCFs (such as the top cycle, the uncovered set, and the essential set) are strategyproof for strict preferences. In this paper, we show that, for weak preferences, only indecisive SCFs can satisfy strategyproofness. In particular, (i) every strategyproof rank-based SCF violates Pareto-optimality, (ii) every strategyproof support-based SCF (which generalize Fishburn’s C2 SCFs) that satisfies Paretooptimality returns at least one most preferred alternative of every voter, and (iii) every strategyproof non-imposing SCF returns a Condorcet loser in at least one profile.

PDF

IJCAI Conference 2021 Conference Paper

Strategyproof Randomized Social Choice for Restricted Sets of Utility Functions

Patrick Lederer

When aggregating preferences of multiple agents, strategyproofness is a fundamental requirement. For randomized voting rules, so-called social decision schemes (SDSs), strategyproofness is usually formalized with the help of utility functions. A classic result shown by Gibbard in 1977 characterizes the set of SDSs that are strategyproof with respect to all utility functions and shows that these SDSs are either indecisive or unfair. For finding more insights into the trade-off between strategyproofness and decisiveness, we propose the notion of U-strategyproofness which requires that only voters with a utility function in the set U cannot manipulate. In particular, we show that if the utility functions in U value the best alternative much more than other alternatives, there are U-strategyproof SDSs that choose an alternative with probability 1 whenever all but k voters rank it first. We also prove for rank-based SDSs that this large gap in the utilities is required to be strategyproof and that the gap must increase in k. On the negative side, we show that U-strategyproofness is incompatible with Condorcet-consistency if U satisfies minimal symmetry conditions and there are at least four alternatives. For three alternatives, the Condorcet rule can be characterized based on U-strategyproofness for the set U containing all equi-distant utility functions.

PDF Details DOI