BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Aviram Imber

Aviram Imber contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computer Science and Game TheoryComputational Complexity

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
2topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Computing the Extremal Possible Ranks with Incomplete Preferences

Various voting rules are based on ranking the candidates by scores induced by aggregating voter preferences. A winner (respectively, unique winner) is a candidate who receives a score not smaller than (respectively, strictly greater than) the remaining candidates. Examples of such rules include the positional scoring rules and the Bucklin, Copeland, and Maximin rules. When voter preferences are known in an incomplete manner as partial orders, a candidate can be a possible/necessary winner based on the possibilities of completing the partial votes. Past research has studied in depth the computational problems of determining the possible and necessary winners and unique winners. These problems are all special cases of reasoning about the range of possible positions of a candidate under different tiebreakers. We investigate the complexity of determining this range, and particularly the extremal positions. Among our results, we establish that finding each of the minimal and maximal positions is NP-hard for each of the above rules, including all positional scoring rules, pure or not. Hence, none of the tractable variants of necessary/possible winner determination remain tractable for extremal position determination. Tractability can be retained when reasoning about the top-$k$ positions for a fixed $k$. Yet, exceptional is Maximin where it is tractable to decide whether the maximal rank is $k$ for $k=1$ (necessary winning) but it becomes intractable for all $k>1$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Probabilistic Inference of Winners in Elections by Independent Random Voters

We investigate the problem of computing the probability of winning in an election where voter attendance is uncertain. More precisely, we study the setting where, in addition to a total ordering of the candidates, each voter is associated with a probability of attending the poll, and the attendances of different voters are probabilistically independent. We show that the probability of winning can be computed in polynomial time for the plurality and veto rules. However, it is computationally hard (#P-hard) for various other rules, including $k$-approval and $k$-veto for $k>1$, Borda, Condorcet, and Maximin. For some of these rules, it is even hard to find a multiplicative approximation since it is already hard to determine whether this probability is nonzero. In contrast, we devise a fully polynomial-time randomized approximation scheme (FPRAS) for the complement probability, namely the probability of losing, for every positional scoring rule (with polynomial scores), as well as for the Condorcet rule.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

The Complexity of Determining the Necessary and Possible Top-k Winners in Partial Voting Profiles

When voter preferences are known in an incomplete (partial) manner, winner determination is commonly treated as the identification of the necessary and possible winners; these are the candidates who win in all completions or at least one completion, respectively, of the partial voting profile. In the case of a positional scoring rule, the winners are the candidates who receive the maximal total score from the voters. Yet, the outcome of an election might go beyond the absolute winners to the top-$k$ winners, as in the case of committee selection, primaries of political parties, and ranking in recruiting. We investigate the computational complexity of determining the necessary and possible top-$k$ winners over partial voting profiles. Our results apply to general classes of positional scoring rules and focus on the cases where $k$ is given as part of the input and where $k$ is fixed.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access