Paper detail

Metric Distortion with Preference Intensities

In voting with ranked ballots, each agent submits a strict ranking of the form $a \succ b \succ c \succ d$ over the alternatives, and the voting rule decides on the winner based on these rankings. Although this ballot format has desirable characteristics, there is a question of whether it is expressive enough for the agents. Kahng, Latifian, and Shah address this issue by adding intensities to the rankings. They introduce the ranking with intensities ballot format, where agents can use both $\succ\!\!\succ$ and $\succ$ in their rankings to express intensive and normal preferences between consecutive alternatives in their rankings. While they focus on analyzing this ballot format in the utilitarian distortion framework, in this work, we look at the potential of using this ballot format from the metric distortion viewpoint. We design a class of voting rules coined Positional Scoring Matching rules, which can be used for different problems in the metric setting, and show that by solving a zero-sum game, we can find the optimal member of this class for our problem. This rule takes intensities into account and achieves a distortion lower than $3$. In addition, by proving a bound on the price of ignoring intensities, we show that we might lose a great deal in terms of distortion by not taking the intensities into account.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.