mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Computing Voting Rules with Elicited Incomplete Votes

arXiv 2402.11104 ↗First posted 16 Feb 2024cs.GT cs.AIcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Motivated by the difficulty of specifying complete ordinal preferences over a large set of m candidates, we study voting rules that are computable by querying voters about t < m candidates. Generalizing prior works that focused on specific instances of this problem, our paper fully characterizes the set of positional scoring rules that can be computed for any 1 ≤ t < m, which, notably, does not include plurality. We then extend this to show a similar impossibility result for single transferable vote (elimination voting). These negative results are information-theoretic and agnostic to the number of queries. Finally, for scoring rules that are computable with limited-sized queries, we give parameterized upper and lower bounds on the number of such queries a deterministic or randomized algorithm must make to determine the score-maximizing candidate. While there is no gap between our bounds for deterministic algorithms, identifying the exact query complexity for randomized algorithms is a challenging open problem, of which we solve one special case.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 3 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Feb 2024.

Builds on

3 of 27 references.

References · 3

  1. 2022Representation with Incomplete Votescited by 13
  2. 2015Sample Complexity for Winner Prediction in Electionscited by 7
  3. 2019Comparing Election Methods Where Each Voter Ranks Only Few Candidatescited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

5 papers.