Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
G Erdélyi, MR Fellows, J Rothe, L Schend (2015)
Control complexity in bucklin and fallback voting: An experimental analysisJ. Comput. Syst. Sci., 81
L Aronshtam (2017)
153Ann. Math. Artif. Intell., 80
JoJ Bartholdi, CA Tovey, MA Trick (1992)
How hard is it to control an election?Math. Comput. Model., 16
PE Hart, NJ Nilsson, B Raphael (1968)
A formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost pathsIEEE Trans. Syst. Sci. Cybern., SSC-4(2)
V Conitzer, T Sandholm, J Lang (2007)
When are elections with few candidates hard to manipulate?J. ACM (JACM), 54
GMJ-B Chaslot, MHM Winands, JH den Herik, JWHM Uiterwijk, B Bouzy (2008)
Progressive strategies for monte-carlo tree searchMath. Nat. Comput., 4
N Betzler, J Uhlmann (2009)
Parameterized complexity of candidate control in elections and related digraph problemsTheor. Comput. Sci., 410
J Pearl (1985)
Heuristics: Intelligent Search Strategies for Computer Problem-Solving
L Aronshtam, H Cohen, T Shrot (2017)
Tennis manipulation: Can we help serena williams win another tournament?Ann. Math. Artif. Intell., 80
N Mattei, J Goldsmith, A Klapper, M Mundhenk (2015)
On the complexity of bribery and manipulation in tournaments with uncertain informationJ. Appl. Log., 13
JJ Bartholdi, CA Tovey, MA Trick (1989)
The computational difficulty of manipulating an electionSoc. Choice Welf., 6
RE Korf (1985)
Depth-first iterative-deepening: An optimal admissible tree searchArtif. Intell., 27
Is it possible for the organizers of a sports tournament to influence the identity of the final winner by manipulating the initial seeding of the tournament? Is it possible to ensure a specific good (i.e. king) player will win at least a certain number of rounds in the tournament? This paper investigates these questions both by means of a theoretical method and a practical approach. The theoretical method focuses on the attempt to identify sufficient conditions to ensure a king player will win at least a pre–defined number of rounds in the tournament. It seems that the tournament must adhere to very strict conditions to ensure the outcome, suggesting that this is a hard problem. The practical approach, on the other hand, uses the Monte Carlo method to demonstrate that these problems are solvable in realistic computational time. A comparison of the results lead to the realization that players with equivalent representation might relax the actual complexity of the problem, and enable manipulation of tournaments that can be controlled in reality.
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence – Springer Journals
Published: Jun 15, 2019
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.