Strategic Voting Axioms for Multiwinner Elections

Austin Lieberman; Matthew I. Jones

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.37373

Strategic Voting Axioms for Multiwinner Elections

Austin Lieberman·Matthew I. Jones

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We create a set of 6 axioms relating to strategic voting and study them on single transferable vote (STV), Meek STV, Bloc, Chamberlin-Courant, Monroe, and k-Borda. For Chamberlin-Courant, Monroe, and k-Borda, we implement ``optimistic'' and ``pessimistic'' models for handing incomplete ballots, thus turning each of the three into two separate voting rules. We determine which voting rules satisfy each axiom. We find that under Chamberlin-Courant and k-Borda, the optimistic models encourage burying, while the pessimistic models encourage truncation strategies, indicating that the handling of partial ballots has tremendous implications for strategic voting. We define an axiom called no skipped payment that differentiates similar rules, as Meek STV and Chamberlin-Courant satisfy it, while STV and Monroe fail. Each voting rule was found to fail favorite betrayal, revealing that none of them are completely immune to strategic voting. In general, STV variants are relatively resistant to strategic voting while Monroe is susceptible to a wide range of strategies.

Explore related subjects

econ.TH

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Austin Lieberman, Matthew I. Jones. 2026-09-29. Strategic Voting Axioms for Multiwinner Elections. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.37373

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Dependence uncertainty: a decision-theoretic approach

Individual risks are often better understood than their dependence. We axiomatize choice under dependence uncertainty on finite product state spaces. Preferences reveal utility and marginal beliefs, while acts are evaluated by an act-dependent weighting of worst- and best-case expected utility over all joint distributions consistent with the marginals. We characterize independence-based behavior, which may reflect either justified beliefs or correlation neglect, and introduce dependence premia as well as a comparative ordering of dependence aversion. We classify acts by their exposure to dependence and characterize independence axioms under which the worst-best weight is constant within each class. Finally, we characterize the geometry and extreme points of the dependence uncertainty set, connecting the behavioral analysis to a copula perspective that does not require real-valued random variables.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2026

The Empirical Content of Reputation Effects

I revisit the classic reputation model in which a long-lived player, either normal or committed, faces short-lived players who may misspecify the commitment-type signal process. I show that the long-lived player's patience makes reputation powerful but leaves its value sensitive both to short-lived players' subjective commitment-type signal process and to discounting. Every subjective process is arbitrarily close over any fixed horizon to processes eliminating his reputation gains and also to processes preserving them. Moreover, generically, all equilibria yield substantial gains along some discount-factor sequences approaching one, while even the best equilibrium yields no positive gain in the limit along others.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2026

Equilibrium Play Without Mutual Knowledge of Rationality

Equilibrium play in two-player zero-sum games is usually justified via epistemic assumptions, such as mutual knowledge of rationality and beliefs, that go far beyond the rationality of the players. We propose a justification that dispenses with these assumptions. To this end, we consider solution concepts that assign to every subgame of a given game a set of plausible actions for each player, and we impose two conditions. Rationality requires that the plausible sets are supports of undominated strategies or, equivalently, that all plausible actions are best responses to a common belief about the opponent. Inheritance requires that plausible actions remain plausible when implausible actions are discarded. In two-player games, the two conditions generically characterize the solution concepts that consistently select supports of Nash equilibria. Zero-sum payoffs ensure that Nash equilibria are generically unique, so that such a selection exists and is unique. Equilibrium play thus emerges from individual rationality and the mutual understanding that plausibility judgments persist when implausible actions are discarded.

econ.TH↗