Manipulation and bribery have received much attention from the social choice community. We study these concepts for preference formalisms that identify a set of optimal outcomes rather than a single winning outcome. We assume that preferences may be ranked differ in importance, and we use the Pareto principle adjusted to the case of ranked preferences as the preference aggregation rule. For two important classes of preferences, representing the extreme ends of the spectrum, we provide characterizations of situations when manipulation and bribery is possible, and establish the complexity of the problems to decide that.
['Ying Zhu', 'Miroslaw Truszczynski']
Manipulation and Bribery When Aggregating Ranked Preferences