IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/theord/v98y2025i2d10.1007_s11238-024-10006-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sabotage-proof social ranking solutions

Author

Listed:
  • Takahiro Suzuki

    (The University of Tokyo)

  • Masahide Horita

    (The University of Tokyo)

Abstract

Robustness against strategic manipulation is a crucial topic in social choice theory. Under some social ranking solutions (SRSs), namely mappings that yield candidates’ ranking from their coalitions’ ranking, candidates can sometimes improve their own social ranking by strategically degrading the coalitions to which they belong (e.g., sabotaging the coalitions to which the candidates and their competitors both belong could damage their competitors’ social rankings). This study investigates SRSs that can prevent such sabotage and promote sincere cooperation between candidates. To this end, we introduce two axioms of SRSs by modifying the non-manipulability (NM) in the literature. An SRS is sabotage-proof (SP) if no candidate can improve their social ranking against anyone else through sabotage, and it is strongly sabotage-proof (SSP) if it is SP and is endowed with a sanction system against specific sabotage. We first demonstrate that the ceteris paribus majority (when there are at least four candidates) and lexicographic excellence solutions are SP but not SSP. We then propose a new characterization of dual lexicographic excellence solution as the unique linear SRS satisfying SSP and coalitional anonymity. Our axiomatic study provides a theoretical ground that lexicographic evaluation of coalitional performances is highly robust against strategic sabotage.

Suggested Citation

  • Takahiro Suzuki & Masahide Horita, 2025. "Sabotage-proof social ranking solutions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 98(2), pages 205-224, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:98:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s11238-024-10006-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11238-024-10006-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11238-024-10006-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11238-024-10006-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giulia Bernardi & Roberto Lucchetti & Stefano Moretti, 2019. "Ranking objects from a preference relation over their subsets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(4), pages 589-606, April.
    2. Béal, Sylvain & Rémila, Eric & Solal, Philippe, 2022. "Lexicographic solutions for coalitional rankings based on individual and collective performances," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    3. Encarnación Algaba & Stefano Moretti & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal, 2021. "Lexicographic solutions for coalitional rankings," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(4), pages 817-849, November.
    4. Peter Fishburn & Steven Brams, 1984. "Manipulability of voting by sincere truncation of preferences," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 397-410, January.
    5. Mark A. Satterthwaite & Hugo Sonnenschein, 1981. "Strategy-Proof Allocation Mechanisms at Differentiable Points," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 48(4), pages 587-597.
    6. Ron Holzman & Hervé Moulin, 2013. "Impartial Nominations for a Prize," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(1), pages 173-196, January.
    7. Gibbard, Allan, 1973. "Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 587-601, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Felix Fritz & Stefano Moretti & Jochen Staudacher, 2023. "Social Ranking Problems at the Interplay between Social Choice Theory and Coalitional Games," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-22, December.
    2. Sylvain Béal & Sylvain Ferrières & Philippe Solal, 2023. "A Core-Partition Ranking Solution to Coalitional Ranking Problems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 965-985, August.
    3. Takahiro Suzuki & Masahide Horita, 2024. "Consistent social ranking solutions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 62(3), pages 549-569, May.
    4. Erlanson, Albin & Szwagrzak, Karol, 2013. "Strategy-Proof Package Assignment," Working Papers 2013:43, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    5. Mizukami, Hideki & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Wakayama, Takuma, 2003. "Strategy-Proof Sharing," Working Papers 1170, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    6. Takamiya, Koji, 2001. "Coalition strategy-proofness and monotonicity in Shapley-Scarf housing markets," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 201-213, March.
    7. Fang-Fang Tang & Yongsheng Xu, 2021. "Corruption in Organizations: Some General Formulations and (In-)Corruptibility Results," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 49-57, December.
    8. Michel Breton & Vera Zaporozhets, 2009. "On the equivalence of coalitional and individual strategy-proofness properties," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(2), pages 287-309, August.
    9. Cho, Wonki Jo & Thomson, William, 2023. "Strategy-proofness in private good economies with linear preferences: An impossibility result," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 1012-1017.
    10. Barbera, Salvador & Jackson, Matthew O, 1995. "Strategy-Proof Exchange," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(1), pages 51-87, January.
    11. Katharina Huesmann & Achim Wambach, 2015. "Constraints on Matching Markets Based on Moral Concerns," CESifo Working Paper Series 5356, CESifo.
    12. Debasis Mishra & Abdul Quadir, 2012. "Deterministic single object auctions with private values," Discussion Papers 12-06, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    13. Maskin, Eric & Sjostrom, Tomas, 2002. "Implementation theory," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 5, pages 237-288, Elsevier.
    14. Takahiro Suzuki, 2025. "Aggregating Opinions on Sets of Alternatives: Characterization and Applications," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 273-295, April.
    15. Diego Moreno & María Moscoso, 2013. "Strategy-proof allocation mechanisms for economies with public goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(1), pages 315-336, January.
    16. Béal, Sylvain & Rémila, Eric & Solal, Philippe, 2022. "Lexicographic solutions for coalitional rankings based on individual and collective performances," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    17. BOSSERT, Walter & WEYMARK, J.A., 2006. "Social Choice: Recent Developments," Cahiers de recherche 01-2006, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    18. Tayfun Sönmez, 1994. "Strategy-proofness in many-to-one matching problems," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 1(1), pages 365-380, December.
    19. Dolors Berga & Bernardo Moreno, 2009. "Strategic requirements with indifference: single-peaked versus single-plateaued preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(2), pages 275-298, February.
    20. Barbera, Salvador & Jackson, Matthew O. & Neme, Alejandro, 1997. "Strategy-Proof Allotment Rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 1-21, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:98:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s11238-024-10006-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.