An extension of May's Theorem to three alternatives: axiomatizing Minimax voting

Overview

• This paper extends May's Theorem, a foundational result in social choice theory, to the case of three alternatives.
• The authors provide an axiomatic characterization of the Minimax voting rule, which is a common voting method used in practice.
• They show that Minimax voting satisfies a set of desirable properties, including anonymity, neutrality, and faithfulness to pairwise comparisons.

Plain English Explanation

Social choice theory is the study of how to aggregate individual preferences into a collective decision. May's Theorem is a foundational result in this field, demonstrating that under certain reasonable assumptions, the simple majority rule is the unique voting method that satisfies these assumptions.

In this paper, the authors extend May's Theorem to the case of three alternatives. They consider a voting method called Minimax, which is commonly used in practice. Minimax works by comparing each pair of alternatives and selecting the alternative that performs best in the pairwise comparisons.

The authors show that Minimax voting satisfies a set of desirable properties, including:

• Anonymity: The outcome doesn't depend on the names or identities of the voters, only their preferences.
• Neutrality: The outcome doesn't depend on the labels of the alternatives, only the voters' preferences between them.
• Faithfulness to pairwise comparisons: The outcome is determined solely by the pairwise comparisons between alternatives, without considering other information about voter preferences.

By proving that Minimax voting satisfies these properties, the authors provide an axiomatic characterization of this voting method, similar to how May's Theorem characterizes simple majority rule. This helps us better understand the theoretical foundations and practical applications of Minimax voting.

Technical Explanation

The authors consider a voting scenario with three alternatives, denoted A, B, and C. Voters express their preferences by ranking the alternatives from most to least preferred.

The key result is an axiomatic characterization of the Minimax voting rule. Minimax works by comparing each pair of alternatives and selecting the alternative that performs best in the pairwise comparisons.

The authors show that Minimax voting is the unique voting method that satisfies the following properties:

1. Anonymity: The outcome doesn't depend on the names or identities of the voters, only their preferences.
2. Neutrality: The outcome doesn't depend on the labels of the alternatives, only the voters' preferences between them.
3. Faithfulness to pairwise comparisons: The outcome is determined solely by the pairwise comparisons between alternatives, without considering other information about voter preferences.

This result extends May's Theorem, which characterized simple majority rule in the case of two alternatives, to the more general setting of three alternatives.

The authors also discuss the relationship between Minimax voting and other voting methods, such as the Condorcet method. They highlight how Minimax voting can be seen as a natural extension of the Condorcet principle to the three-alternative case.

Critical Analysis

The authors provide a rigorous and insightful analysis of Minimax voting, but there are a few potential limitations and areas for further research:

1. The axiomatic characterization is limited to the case of three alternatives. It would be valuable to extend the analysis to voting scenarios with more than three alternatives.
2. The authors do not discuss the computational complexity of Minimax voting or potential issues with strategic manipulation. These are important practical considerations that could be explored in future work.
3. The paper focuses on the theoretical properties of Minimax voting, but does not provide empirical evidence on its real-world performance. Studying Minimax voting in large-scale elections or simulations could yield valuable insights.

Overall, this paper makes an important contribution to the theoretical foundations of voting theory and highlights the significance of the Minimax voting rule. The results provide a deeper understanding of the properties and implications of this widely used voting method.

Conclusion

This paper extends the foundational May's Theorem to the case of three alternatives, providing an axiomatic characterization of the Minimax voting rule. The authors demonstrate that Minimax voting satisfies desirable properties like anonymity, neutrality, and faithfulness to pairwise comparisons.

By establishing the theoretical underpinnings of Minimax voting, this research helps us better understand the practical applications and implications of this widely used voting method. The results also suggest avenues for further exploration, such as extending the analysis to more than three alternatives and investigating computational and strategic aspects of Minimax voting.

Overall, this paper advances our knowledge of social choice theory and offers insights that could inform the design and implementation of voting systems in real-world contexts.