Judgment Aggregation Rules and Voting Rules

  • Jérôme Lang
  • Marija Slavkovik
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8176)


Several recent articles have defined and studied judgment aggregation rules based on some minimization principle. Although some of them are defined by analogy with some voting rules, the exact connection between these rules and voting rules is not always obvious. We explore these connections and show how several well-known voting rules such as the top cycle, Copeland, maximin, Slater or ranked pairs, are recovered as specific cases of judgment aggregation rules.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [Bai87]
    Baigent, N.: Metric rationalization of social choice functions according to principles of social choice. Mathematical Social Science 14(1), 59–65 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [BF12]
    Brill, M., Fischer, F.A.: The price of neutrality for the ranked pairs method. In: AAAI (2012)Google Scholar
  3. [Die12]
    Dietrich, F.: Scoring rules for judgment aggregation. MPRA paper, University Library of Munich, Germany (2012)Google Scholar
  4. [DL07]
    Dietrich, F., List, C.: Arrow’s theorem in judgment aggregation. Social Choice and Welfare 29(1), 19–33 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [DL08]
    Dietrich, F., List, C.: Judgment aggregation under constraints. In: Boylan, T., Gekker, R. (eds.) Economics, Rational Choice and Normative Philosophy, Routledge (2008)Google Scholar
  6. [DP12]
    Duddy, C., Piggins, A.: A measure of distance between judgment sets. Social Choice and Welfare 39, 855–867 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [EFS09]
    Elkind, E., Faliszewski, P., Slinko, A.: On distance rationalizability of some voting rules. In: TARK, pp. 108–117 (2009)Google Scholar
  8. [EFS12]
    Elkind, E., Faliszewski, P., Slinko, A.: Rationalizations of condorcet-consistent rules via distances of hamming type. Social Choice and Welfare 39(4), 891–905 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [EGP12]
    Endriss, U., Grandi, U., Porello, D.: Complexity of judgment aggregation. Journal Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR) 45, 481–514 (2012)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. [EM05]
    Eckert, D., Mitlöhner, J.: Logical representation and merging of preference information. In: Proceedings of the IJCAI 2005 Multidisciplinary Workshop on Preference Handling (2005)Google Scholar
  11. [GE13]
    Grandi, U., Endriss, U.: Lifting integrity constraints in binary aggregation. Artificial Intelligence, 199–200, 45–66 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. [Kla05a]
    Klamler, C.: Borda and condorcet: some distance results. Theory and Decision 59(2), 97–109 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. [Kla05b]
    Klamler, C.: The copeland rule and condorcet’s pirnciple. Economic Theory 25(3), 745–749 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. [KPP02]
    Konieczny, S., Pino-Pérez, R.: Merging information under constraints: a logical framework. Journal of Logic and Computation 12(5), 773–808 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. [LPSvdT11]
    Lang, J., Pigozzi, G., Slavkovik, M., van der Torre, L.: Judgment aggregation rules based on minimization. In: TARK, pp. 238–246 (2011)Google Scholar
  16. [MN08]
    Meskanen, T., Nurmi, H.: Closeness counts in social choice. In: Power, Freedom, and Voting, pp. 289–306. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
  17. [MO09]
    Miller, M.K., Osherson, D.: Methods for distance-based judgment aggregation. Social Choice and Welfare 32(4), 575–601 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. [NPP11]
    Nehring, K., Pivato, M., Puppe, C.: Condorcet admissibility: Indeterminacy and path-dependence under majority voting on interconnected decisions (July 2011),
  19. [Tid87]
    Tideman, T.N.: Independence of clones as a criterion for voting rules. Social Choice and Welfare 4, 185–206 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jérôme Lang
    • 1
  • Marija Slavkovik
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Université Paris-DauphineFrance
  2. 2.University of LiverpoolUK
  3. 3.University of BergenNorway

Personalised recommendations