
We prove that there is no preferential voting method satisfying the Condorcet winner and loser criteria, positive involvement (if a candidate <i>x</i> wins in an initial preference profile, then adding a voter who ranks <i>x</i> uniquely first cannot cause <i>x</i> to lose), and <i>n</i>-voter resolvability (if <i>x</i> initially ties for winning, then <i>x</i> can be made the unique winner by adding some set of up to <i>n</i> voters). This impossibility theorem holds for any positive integer <i>n</i>. It also holds if either the Condorcet loser criterion is replaced by independence of clones or positive involvement is replaced by negative involvement.
Computer Science and Game Theory, FOS: Economics and business, FOS: Computer and information sciences, 91B12, 91B14, 91B10, I.2.11, Theoretical Economics (econ.TH), Theoretical Economics, Multiagent Systems, Computer Science and Game Theory (cs.GT), Multiagent Systems (cs.MA)
Computer Science and Game Theory, FOS: Economics and business, FOS: Computer and information sciences, 91B12, 91B14, 91B10, I.2.11, Theoretical Economics (econ.TH), Theoretical Economics, Multiagent Systems, Computer Science and Game Theory (cs.GT), Multiagent Systems (cs.MA)
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
