Some distinguished types of voters, as vetoes, passers or nulls, as well as some others, play a significant role in voting systems because they are either the most powerful or the least powerful voters in the game independently of the measure used to evaluate power. In this paper we are concerned with the design of voting systems with at least one type of these extreme voters and with few types of equivalent voters. With this purpose in mind we enumerate these special classes of games and find out that its number always follows a Fibonacci sequence with smooth polynomial variations. As a consequence we find several families of games with the same asymptotic exponential behavior except for a multiplicative factor which is the golden number or its square. From a more general point of view, our studies are related with the design of voting structures with a predetermined importance ranking.
The number @math of complete simple games with @math voters belonging to exactly two types of voters were recently enumerated in @cite_22 and later on in @cite_27 , giving a simpler proof: where @math are the Fibonacci numbers which constitute a well--known sequence of integer numbers defined by the following recurrence relation: @math , @math , and @math for all @math .
@cite_27 @cite_22
2158578607 1644339822 2050727325 1993559206
We investigate voting systems with two classes of voters, for which there is a hierarchy giving each member of the stronger class more influence or important than each member of the weaker class. We deduce for voting systems one important counting fact that allows determining how many of them are for a given number of voters. In fact, the number of these systems follows a Fibonacci sequence with a smooth polynomial variation on the number of voters. On the other hand, we classify by means of some parameters which of these systems are weighted. This result allows us to state an asymptotic conjecture which is opposed to what occurs for symmetric games. In this paper, we propose a framework to study a general class of strategic behavior in voting, which we call vote operations. We prove the following theorem: if we fix the number of alternatives, generate @math votes i.i.d. according to a distribution @math , and let @math go to infinity, then for any @math , with probability at least @math , the minimum number of operations that are needed for the strategic individual to achieve her goal falls into one of the following four categories: (1) 0, (2) @math , (3) @math , and (4) @math . This theorem holds for any set of vote operations, any individual vote distribution @math , and any integer generalized scoring rule, which includes (but is not limited to) almost all commonly studied voting rules, e.g., approval voting, all positional scoring rules (including Borda, plurality, and veto), plurality with runoff, Bucklin, Copeland, maximin, STV, and ranked pairs. We also show that many well-studied types of strategic behavior fall under our framework, including (but not limited to) constructive destructive manipulation, bribery, and control by adding deleting votes, margin of victory, and minimum manipulation coalition size. Therefore, our main theorem naturally applies to these problems. Simple games cover voting systems in which a single alternative, such as a bill or an amendment, is pitted against the status quo. A simple game or a yes–no voting system is a set of rules that specifies exactly which collections of “yea” votes yield passage of the issue at hand, each of these collections of “yea” voters forms a winning coalition. We are interested in performing a complexity analysis on problems defined on such families of games. This analysis as usual depends on the game representation used as input. We consider four natural explicit representations: winning, losing, minimal winning, and maximal losing. We first analyze the complexity of testing whether a game is simple and testing whether a game is weighted. We show that, for the four types of representations, both problems can be solved in polynomial time. Finally, we provide results on the complexity of testing whether a simple game or a weighted game is of a special type. We analyze strongness, properness, decisiveness and homogeneity, which are desirable properties to be fulfilled for a simple game. We finalize with some considerations on the possibility of representing a game in a more succinct representation showing a natural representation in which the recognition problem is hard. We state an integer linear programming formulation for the unique characterization of complete simple games, i.e. a special subclass of monotone Boolean functions. In order to apply the parametric Barvinok algorithm to obtain enumeration formulas for these discrete objects we provide a tailored decomposition of the integer programming formulation into a finite list of suitably chosen sub-cases. As for the original enumeration problem of Dedekind on Boolean functions we have to introduce some parameters to be able to derive exact formulas for small parameters. Recently, have proven an enumeration formula for complete simple games with two types of voters. We will provide a shorter proof and a new enumeration formula for complete simple games with two minimal winning vectors.