For some well-known games, such as the Traveler's Dilemma or the Centipede Game, traditional game-theoretic solution concepts — most notably Nash equilibrium — predict outcomes that are not consistent with empirical observations. We introduce a new solution concept, iterated regret minimization,   which exhibits the same qualitative behavior as that observed in experiments in many games of interest, including Traveler's Dilemma, the Centipede Game, Nash bargaining, and Bertrand competition.   As the name suggests, iterated regret minimization involves the iterated deletion of strategies that do not minimize regret.

A significantly complete account of the complexity underlying the computation of relevant solution concepts in compact coalitional games is provided. The starting investigation point is the setting of graph games, about which various long-standing open problems were stated in the literature. The paper gives an answer to most of them, and in addition provides new insights on this setting, by stating a number of complexity results about some relevant generalizations and specializations. The presented results also pave the way towards precisely carving the tractability frontier characterizing computation problems on compact coalitional games.

In 1992, Bartholdi, Tovey, and Trick opened the study of control attacks on elections — attempts to improve the election outcome by such actions as adding/deleting candidates or voters. That work has led to many results on how algorithms can be used to find attacks on elections and how complexity-theoretic hardness results can be used as shields against attacks. However, all the work in this line has assumed that the attacker employs just a single type of attack. In this paper, we model and study the case in which the attacker launches a multipronged (i.e., multimode) attack.   We do so to more realistically capture the richness of real-life settings. For example, an attacker might simultaneously try to suppress some voters, attract new voters into the election, and introduce a spoiler candidate. Our model provides a unified framework for such varied attacks, and by constructing polynomial-time multiprong attack algorithms we prove that for various election systems even such concerted, flexible attacks can be perfectly planned in deterministic polynomial time.

Voting theory can provide useful insights for multiagent preference aggregation. However, the standard setting assumes voters with preferences that are total orders, as well as a ballot language that coincides with the preference language. In typical AI scenarios, these assumptions do not hold: certain alternatives may be incomparable for some agents, and others may have their preferences encoded in a format that is different from how the preference aggregation mechanism wants them. We study the consequences of dropping these assumptions. In particular, we investigate the consequences for the important notion of strategy-proofness. While strategy-proofness cannot be guaranteed in the classical setting, we are able to show that there are situations in our more general framework where this is possible. We also consider computational aspects of the problem.

In social choice, a preference function (PF) takes a set of votes (linear orders over a set of alternatives) as input, and produces one or more rankings (also linear orders over the alternatives) as output. Such functions have many applications, for example, aggregating the preferences of multiple agents, or merging rankings (of, say, webpages) into a single ranking. The key issue is choosing a PF to use. One natural and previously studied approach is to assume that there is an unobserved "correct" ranking, and the votes are noisy estimates of this. Then, we can use the PF that always chooses the maximum likelihood estimate (MLE) of the correct ranking. In this paper, we define simple ranking scoring functions (SRSFs) and show that the class of neutral SRSFs is exactly the class of neutral PFs that are MLEs for some noise model. We also define composite ranking scoring functions (CRSFs) and show a condition under which these coincide with SRSFs. We study key properties such as consistency and continuity, and consider some example PFs. In particular, we study Single Transferable Vote (STV), a commonly used PF, showing that it is a CRSF but not an SRSF, thereby clarifying the extent to which it is an MLE function. This also gives a new perspective on how ties should be broken under STV. We leave some open questions.

Voting on multiple related issues is an important and difficult problem. The key difficulty is that the number of alternatives is exponential in the number of issues, and hence it is infeasible for the agents to rank all the alternatives. A simple approach is to vote on the issues one at a time, in sequence; however, a drawback is that the outcome may depend on the order in which the issues are voted upon and decided, which gives the chairperson some control over the outcome of the election because she can strategically determine the order. While this is undeniably a negative feature of sequential voting, in this paper we temper this judgment by showing that the chairperson's control problem is, in most cases, computationally hard.

In many practical contexts where a number of agents have to find a common decision, the votes do not come all together at the same time. In such situations, we may want to preprocess the information given by the subelectorate (consisting of the voters who have expressed their votes) so as to ``compile'' the known votes for the time when the latecomers have expressed their votes. We study the amount of space necessary for such a compilation, as a function of the voting rule, the number of candidates, and the number of votes already known. We relate our results to existing work, especially on communication complexity.

Runtime commitment verification is an important, open issue in multiagent research. To address it, we build on Yolum and Singh's formalization of commitment operations, on Chittaro and Montanari's cached event calculus, and on the SCIFF abductive logic programming proof-procedure. We propose a framework consisting of a declarative and compact language to express the domain knowledge, and a reactive and complete procedure to track the status of commitments effectively, producing provably sound and irrevocable answers.

We introduce coalitional games with beliefs (CGBs), a natural generalization of coalitional games to environments where agents possess private beliefs regarding the capabilities (or types) of others. We put forward a model to capture such agent-type uncertainty, and study coalitional stability in this setting. Specifically, we introduce a notion of the core for CGBs, both with and without coalition structures. For simple games without coalition structures, we then provide a characterization of the core that matches the one for the full information case, and use it to derive a polynomial-time algorithm to check core nonemptiness. In contrast, we demonstrate that in games with coalition structures allowing beliefs increases the computational complexity of stability-related problems. In doing so, we introduce and analyze weighted voting games with beliefs, which may be of independent interest. Finally, we discuss connections between our model and other classes of coalitional games.

While there are several languages for representing combinatorial preferences over sets of alternatives, none of these are well-suited to the representation of ordinal preferences over sets of goods (which are typically required to be monotonic). We propose such a language, taking inspiration from previous work on graphical languages for preference representation, specifically CP-nets, and introduce conditional importance networks (CI-nets).  A CI-net includes statements of the form "if I have a set A of goods, and I do not have any of the goods from some other set B, then I prefer the set of goods C over the set of goods D." We investigate expressivity and complexity issues for CI-nets. Then we show that CI-nets are well-suited to the description of fair division problems.