Skip to main content
Book cover

International Conference on Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems

PRIMA 2014: PRIMA 2014: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems pp 341–356Cite as

Judgment Aggregation with Abstentions under Voters’ Hierarchy

  • Conference paper

  • 1113 Accesses

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNAI,volume 8861)

Abstract

Similar to Arrow’s impossibility theorem for preference aggregation, judgment aggregation has also an intrinsic impossibility for generating consistent group judgment from individual judgments. Removing some of the pre-assumed conditions would mitigate the problem but may still lead to too restrictive solutions. It was proved that if completeness is removed but other plausible conditions are kept, the only possible aggregation functions are oligarchic, which means that the group judgment is purely determined by a certain subset of participating judges. Instead of further challenging the other conditions, this paper investigates how the judgment from each individual judge affects the group judgment in an oligarchic environment. We explore a set of intuitively demanded conditions under abstentions and design a feasible judgment aggregation rule based on the agents’ hierarchy. We show this proposed aggregation rule satisfies the desirable conditions. More importantly, this rule is oligarchic with respect to a subset of agenda instead of the whole agenda due to its literal-based characteristics.

Keywords

  • Social Choice
  • Aggregation Function
  • Aggregation Rule
  • Collective Rationality
  • Propositional Variable

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-13191-7_28
  • Chapter length: 16 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-319-13191-7
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dietrich, F., List, C.: Arrow’s theorem in judgment aggregation. Social Choice and Welfare 29(1), 19–33 (2007)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Mongin, P.: Consistent bayesian aggregation. Journal of Economic Theory 66(2), 313–351 (1995)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Pigozzi, G.: Belief merging and the discursive dilemma: an argument-based account to paradoxes of judgment aggregation. Synthese 152(2), 285–298 (2006)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Wilson, R.: On the theory of aggregation. Journal of Economic Theory 10(1), 89–99 (1975)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Konieczny, S., Pérez, R.P.: Merging information under constraints: a logical framework. Journal of Logic and Computation 12(5), 773–808 (2002)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Kornhauser, L.A., Sager, L.G.: Unpacking the court. The Yale Law Journal 96(1), 82–117 (1986)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. List, C.: The theory of judgment aggregation: an introductory review. Synthese 187(1), 179–207 (2012)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Pettit, P.: Deliberative democracy and the discursive dilemma. Philosophical Issues 11(1), 268–299 (2001)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. Pivato, M.: The discursive dilemma and probabilistic judgement aggregation. Munich Personal RePEc Archive (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Arrow, K.J.: A difficulty in the concept of social welfare. Journal of Political Economy 58, 328–346 (1950)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. List, C., Pettit, P.: Aggregating sets of judgments: An impossibility result. Economics and Philosophy 18(01), 89–110 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dietrich, F.: Judgment aggregation (im)possibility theorems. Journal of Economic Theory 126(1), 286–298 (2006)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. List, C., Pettit, P.: Aggregating sets of judgments: Two impossibility results compared. Synthese 140(1-2), 207–235 (2004)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Mongin, P.: Factoring out the impossibility of logical aggregation. Journal of Economic Theory 141(1), 100–113 (2008)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Pauly, M., Van Hees, M.: Logical constraints on judgement aggregation. Journal of Philosophical logic 35(6), 569–585 (2006)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Van Hees, M.: The limits of epistemic democracy. Social Choice and Welfare 28(4), 649–666 (2007)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Dietrich, F., List, C.: Judgment aggregation with consistency alone. London School of Economics, Government Department, London, UK (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dietrich, F., List, C.: Judgment aggregation without full rationality. Social Choice and Welfare 31(1), 15–39 (2008)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Dokow, E., Holzman, R.: Aggregation of binary evaluations with abstentions. Journal of Economic Theory 145(2), 544–561 (2010)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Gärdenfors, P.: A representation theorem for voting with logical consequences. Economics and Philosophy 22(2), 181–190 (2006)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  21. Jiang, G., Zhang, D., Tang, X.: Judgment aggregation with abstentions: A hierarchical approach. In: Grossi, D., Roy, O., Huang, H. (eds.) LORI. LNCS, vol. 8196, pp. 321–325. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  22. Dietrich, F., List, C.: A liberal paradox for judgment aggregation. Social Choice and Welfare 31(1), 59–78 (2008)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Mongin, P.: Factoring out the impossibility of logical aggregation. Journal of Economic Theory 141(1), 100–113 (2008)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Dietrich, F.: A generalised model of judgment aggregation. Social Choice and Welfare 28(4), 529–565 (2007)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Arrow, K.J.: Social Choice and Individual Values. Cowles Foundation Monographs. Wiley, New York (1953, 1964)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Nehring, K., Puppe, C.: Consistent judgement aggregation: the truth-functional case. Social Choice and Welfare 31(1), 41–57 (2008)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Dietrich, F., Mongin, P.: The premiss-based approach to judgment aggregation. Journal of Economic Theory 145(2), 562–582 (2010)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Andréka, H., Ryan, M., Schobbens, P.Y.: Operators and laws for combining preference relations. Journal of Logic and Computation 12(1), 13–53 (2002)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Rossi, F., Venable, K.B., Walsh, T.: Aggregating preferences cannot be fair. Intelligenza Artificiale 2(1), 30–38 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Dietrich, F., List, C.: Propositionwise judgment aggregation: the general case. Social Choice and Welfare 40(4), 1067–1095 (2013)

    MathSciNet  CrossRef  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. AIRG, University of Western Sydney, Australia

    Guifei Jiang & Dongmo Zhang

  2. IRIT, University of Toulouse, France

    Guifei Jiang & Laurent Perrussel

Authors
  1. Guifei Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dongmo Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laurent Perrussel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer Science and Software Engineering, University of Wollongong, Northfields Avenue, 2522, Wollongong, NSW, Australia

    Hoa Khanh Dam

  2. Imperial College, SW7 2BT, London, UK

    Jeremy Pitt

  3. University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, 610051, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

    Yang Xu

  4. NICTA Queensland Research Laboratory, GPO Box 2434, 4001, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Guido Governatori

  5. Nagoya Institute of Technology, Gokiso-cho, 466-8555, Showa-ku, Nagoya, Japan

    Takayuki Ito

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Jiang, G., Zhang, D., Perrussel, L. (2014). Judgment Aggregation with Abstentions under Voters’ Hierarchy. In: Dam, H.K., Pitt, J., Xu, Y., Governatori, G., Ito, T. (eds) PRIMA 2014: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems. PRIMA 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8861. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13191-7_28

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13191-7_28

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-13190-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-13191-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)