Improved Bounds for Single-Nomination Impartial Selection
Abstract
We give new bounds for the single-nomination model of impartial selection, a problem proposed by Holzman and Moulin (Econometrica, 2013). A selection mechanism, which may be randomized, selects one individual from a group of n based on nominations among members of the group; a mechanism is impartial if the selection of an individual is independent of nominations cast by that individual, and α-optimal if under any circumstance the expected number of nominations received by the selected individual is at least α times that received by any individual. In a many-nominations model, where individuals may cast an arbitrary number of nominations, the so-called permutation mechanism is 1/2-optimal, and this is best possible. In the single-nomination model, where each individual casts exactly one nomination, the permutation mechanism does better and prior to this work was known to be 67/108-optimal but no better than 2/3-optimal. We show that it is in fact 2/3-optimal for all n. This result is obtained via tight bounds on the performance of the mechanism for graphs with maximum degree , for any , which we prove using an adversarial argument. We then show that the permutation mechanism is not best possible; indeed, by combining the permutation mechanism, another mechanism called plurality with runner-up, and some new ideas, 2105/3147-optimality can be achieved for all n. We finally give new upper bounds on α for any α-optimal impartial mechanism. They improve on the existing upper bounds for all n≥ 7 and imply that no impartial mechanism can be better than 76/105-optimal for all n; they do not preclude the existence of a (3/4-)-optimal impartial mechanism for arbitrary >0 if n is large.
Turn this paper into a lesson
ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.