Abstract
In sports competitions, teams can manipulate the result by, for instance, throwing games. We show that we can decide how to manipulate round robin and cup competitions, two of the most popular types of sporting competitions in polynomial time. In addition, we show that finding the minimal number of games that need to be thrown to manipulate the result can also be determined in polynomial time. Finally, we show that there are several different variations of standard cup competitions where manipulation remains polynomial.
This work is funded by an NSERC Postgraduate Scholarship1, the Department of Broadband, Communications and Digital Economy2 and the Australian Research Council2.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Altman, A., Procaccia, A.D., Tennenholtz, M.: Nonmanipulable Selections from a Tournament. In: Proc. of 21st Intl. Joint Conf. on AI (2009)
Bartholdi, J.J., Tovey, C.A., Trick, M.A.: The computational difficulty of manipulating an election. Social Choice and Welfare 6, 227–241 (1989)
Conitzer, V., Sandholm, T., Lang, J.: When are elections with few candidates hard to manipulate? J. ACM 54, 1–33 (2007)
Faliszewski, P., Hemaspaandra, E., Schnoor, H.: Copeland voting: Ties matter. In: Proc. of the 7th Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2008)
Gusfield, D., Martel, C.E.: The structure and complexity of sports elimination numbers. Algorithmica 32, 73–86 (2002)
Hazon, N., Dunne, P.E., Kraus, S., Wooldridge, M.: How to Rig Elections and Competitions. In: Proc. of 2nd Int. Workshop on Computational Social Choice (2008)
Kern, W., Paulusma, D.: The computational complexity of the elimination problem in generalized sports competitions. Discrete Optimization 1, 205–214 (2004)
Lang, J., Pini, M.S., Rossi, F., Venable, K.B., Walsh, T.: Winner Determination in Sequential Majority Voting. In: Proc. of the 20th Int. Joint Conf. on AI (2007)
McCormick, S.T.: Fast algorithms for parametric scheduling come from extensions to parametric maximum flow. Operations Research 47, 744–756 (1999)
Pini, M.S., Rossi, F., Venable, K.B., Walsh, T.: Dealing with incomplete agents’ preferences and an uncertain agenda in group decision making via sequential majority voting. In: Proc. of the 11th Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (2008)
Tang, P., Shoham, Y., Lin, F.: Team Competition. In: Proc. of 8th Intl. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2009)
Vu, T., Altman, A., Shoham, Y.: On the Complexity of Schedule Control Problems for Knockout Tournaments. In: Proc. of 8th Intl. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2009)
Walsh, T.: Where are the really hard manipulation problems? The phase transition in manipulating the veto rule. In: Proc. of 21st Intl. Joint Conf. on AI (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Russell, T., Walsh, T. (2009). Manipulating Tournaments in Cup and Round Robin Competitions. In: Rossi, F., Tsoukias, A. (eds) Algorithmic Decision Theory. ADT 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 5783. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04428-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04428-1_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-04427-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-04428-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)