Manipulation of Voting Schemes¶
Gibbard, A. (1973). Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result. Econometrica, 41(4), 587-601.
Cited by¶
4 citations across 4 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Incentive Compatibility
- This matters especially in distributed or private-information settings, where no central authority can verify each agent's type or action. The revelation principle, formalized by Myerson (1979) and Gibbard (1973)
This sourceProves that every non-dictatorial voting rule with three or more alternatives is manipulable; foundational impossibility result connecting voting-rule design to strategic incentives faced by voters.
- This matters especially in distributed or private-information settings, where no central authority can verify each agent's type or action. The revelation principle, formalized by Myerson (1979) and Gibbard (1973)
- Mechanism Design
- The Myerson-Satterthwaite impossibility theorem proves that for bilateral trade with private values, no mechanism can be simultaneously efficient, individually rational, budget-balanced, and Bayesian incentive-compatible. Gibbard-Satterthwaite (Gibbard 1973
This sourceProves that every non-dictatorial voting rule with three or more alternatives is manipulable; foundational impossibility result connecting voting-rule design to strategic incentives faced by voters.
- The Myerson-Satterthwaite impossibility theorem proves that for bilateral trade with private values, no mechanism can be simultaneously efficient, individually rational, budget-balanced, and Bayesian incentive-compatible. Gibbard-Satterthwaite (Gibbard 1973
Domain-specific¶
Verification¶
This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:1e05717350c1 · see in the full table