The fair division of indivisible goods is not only a subject of theoretical research, but also an important problem in practice, with solutions being offered on several online platforms. Little is known, however, about the characteristics of real-world allocation instances and how they compare to synthetic instances. Using dimensionality reduction, we compute a map of allocation instances: a 2-dimensional embedding such that an instance's location on the map is predictive of the instance's origin and other key instance features. Because the axes of this map closely align with the utility matrix's two largest singular values, we define a second, explicit map, which we theoretically characterize.

In parliamentary elections, parties compete for a limited, typically fixed number of seats. Most parliaments are assembled using apportionment methods that distribute the seats based on the parties' vote counts. Common apportionment methods include divisor sequence methods (like D'Hondt or Sainte-Laguë), the largest-remainder method, and first-past-the-post. In many countries, an electoral threshold is implemented to prevent very small parties from entering the parliament. Further, several countries have apportionment systems that incorporate multiple districts. We study how computationally hard it is to change the election outcome (i.e., to increase or limit the influence of a distinguished party) by convincing a limited number of voters to change their vote. We refer to these bribery-style attacks as \emph{strategic campaigns} and study the corresponding problems in terms of their computational (both classical and parameterized) complexity. We also run extensive experiments on real-world election data and study the effectiveness of optimal campaigns, in particular as opposed to using heuristic bribing strategies and with respect to the influence of the threshold and the influence of the number of districts. For apportionment elections with threshold, finally, we propose -- as an alternative to the standard top-choice mode -- the second-chance mode where voters of parties below the threshold receive a second chance to vote for another party, and we establish computational complexity results also in this setting.

We study the task of electing egalitarian sequences of τ committees given a set of agents with additive utilities for candidates available on each of τ levels. We introduce several rules for electing an egalitarian committee sequence as well as properties for such rules. We settle the computational complexity of finding a winning sequence for our rules and classify them against our properties. Additionally, we transform sequential election data from existing election data from the literature. Using this data set, we compare our rules empirically and test them experimentally against our properties.

We consider the problem of resolving the envy of a given initial allocation by adding elements from a pool of goods. We give a characterization of the instances where envy can be resolved by adding an arbitrary number of copies of the items in the pool. From this characterization, we derive a polynomial-time algorithm returning a respective solution if it exists. If the number of copies or the total number of added items are bounded, the problem becomes computationally intractable even in various restricted cases. We perform a parameterized complexity analysis, focusing on the number of agents and the pool size as parameters. Notably, although not every instance admits an envy-free solution, our approach allows us to efficiently determine, in polynomial time, whether a solution exists—an aspect that is both theoretically interesting and far from trivial.

Our main contribution is the introduction of the map of elections framework. A map of elections consists of three main elements: (1) a dataset of elections (i.e., collections of ordinal votes over given sets of candidates), (2) a way of measuring similarities between these elections, and (3) a representation of the elections in the 2D Euclidean space as points, so that the more similar two elections are, the closer are their points. In our maps, we mostly focus on datasets of synthetic elections, but we also show an example of a map over real-life ones. To measure similarities, we would have preferred to use, e.g., the isomorphic swap distance, but this is infeasible due to its high computational complexity. Hence, we propose polynomial-time computable positionwise distance and use it instead. Regarding the representations in 2D Euclidean space , we mostly use the Kamada-Kawai algorithm, but we also show two alternatives. We develop the necessary theoretical results to form our maps and argue experimentally that they are accurate and credible. Further, we show how coloring the elections in a map according to various criteria helps in analyzing results of a number of experiments. In particular, we show colorings according to the scores of winning candidates or committees, running times of ILP-based winner determination algorithms, and approximation ratios achieved by particular algorithms.

In LoRaWANs, the distance between sensor devices and gateways can reach up to several kilometers. Determining whether a particular location within this range is suitable for the reliable operation of a wireless sensing device is, however, not trivial by means of theoretical analysis alone. Numerous factors besides the power at which a signal is transmitted, such as obstacles in the line-of-sight path, govern whether connectivity is given. Real-world deployments of LoRa devices are hence typically preceded by connectivity assessments using field test devices. This process, mostly realized by having a person move around a target zone to find the position that leads to the strongest LoRa signal reception at a gateway, is labor-intensive and needs to be repeated for every device to be newly rolled out. We demonstrate how this process can be automated by pre-populating LoRaWAN coverage maps with the help of bicycle riders, rather than taking measurements on-demand. We accomplish this through determining an optimal set of routes for bicyclists, to ride along all accessible tracks in an area of interest. By equipping cyclists with LoRa transmitters which periodically send out location beacons, receiving gateways can autonomously derive connectivity maps of their surrounding area. We visualize received signal strength values in the form of heatmaps, which can be used to make informed decisions about suitable deployment locations for additional sensors.

To aggregate rankings into a social ranking, one can use scoring systems such as Plurality, Veto, and Borda. We distinguish three types of methods: ranking by score, ranking by repeatedly choosing a winner that we delete and rank at the top, and ranking by repeatedly choosing a loser that we delete and rank at the bottom. The latter method captures the frequently studied voting rules Single Transferable Vote (aka Instant Runoff Voting), Coombs, and Baldwin. In an experimental analysis, we show that the three types of methods produce different rankings in practice. We also provide evidence that sequentially selecting winners is most suitable to detect the "true" ranking of candidates. For different rules in our classes, we then study the (parameterized) computational complexity of deciding in which positions a given candidate can appear in the chosen ranking. As part of our analysis, we also consider the Winner Determination problem for STV, Coombs, and Baldwin and determine their complexity when there are few voters or candidates.

Using insights from parametric integer linear programming, we improve the work of Bredereck et al. [Proc. ACM EC 2019] on high-multiplicity fair allocation. Answering an open question from their work, we proved that the problem of finding envy-free Pareto-efficient allocations of indivisible items is fixed-parameter tractable with respect to the combined parameter “number of agents” plus “number of item types.” Our central improvement, compared to their result, is to break the condition that the corresponding utility and multiplicity values have to be encoded in unary, which is required there. Concretely, we show that, while preserving fixed-parameter tractability, these values can be encoded in binary. Thus, we substantially expand the range of feasible utility and multiplicity values.

We study the computational complexity of identifying a small agreeable subset of items. A subset of items is agreeable if every agent does not prefer its complement set. We study settings in which agents either can assign arbitrary utilities to the items; can approve or disapprove the items; or can rank the items (in which case we consider Borda utilities). We prove that deciding whether an agreeable set exists is NP-hard for all variants; and we perform a parameterized analysis regarding the following natural parameters: the number of agents, the number of items, and the upper bound on the size of the agreeable set in question.

We study the election of sequences of committees, where in each of tau levels (e.g. modeling points in time) a committee consisting of k candidates from a common set of m candidates is selected. For each level, each of n agents (voters) may nominate one candidate whose selection would satisfy her. We are interested in committees which are good with respect to the satisfaction per day and per agent. More precisely, we look for egalitarian or equitable committee sequences. While both guarantee that at least x agents per day are satisfied, egalitarian committee sequences ensure that each agent is satisfied in at least y levels while equitable committee sequences ensure that each agent is satisfied in exactly y levels. We analyze the parameterized complexity of finding such committees for the parameters n, m, k, tau, x, and y, as well as combinations thereof.

Abstract Given a set of agents qualifying or disqualifying each other, group identification is the task of identifying a socially qualified subgroup of agents. Social qualification depends on the specific rule used to aggregate individual qualifications . The classical bribery problem in this context asks how many agents need to change their qualifications in order to change the outcome in a certain way. Complementing previous results showing polynomial-time solvability or NP-hardness of bribery for various social rules in the constructive (aiming at making specific agents socially qualified) or destructive (aiming at making specific agents socially disqualified) setting, we provide a comprehensive picture of the parameterized computational complexity landscape. Conceptually, we also consider a more fine-grained concept of bribery cost, where we ask how many single qualifications need to be changed, nonunit prices for different bribery actions, and a more general bribery goal that combines the constructive and destructive setting.

Given an initial resource allocation, where some agents may envy others or where a different distribution of resources might lead to a higher social welfare, our goal is to improve the allocation without reassigning resources. We consider a sharing concept allowing resources being shared with social network neighbors of the resource owners. More precisely, our model allows agents to form pairs which then may share a limited number of resources. Sharing a resource can come at some costs or loss in utility. To this end, we introduce a formal model that allows a central authority to compute an optimal sharing between neighbors based on an initial allocation. Advocating this point of view, we focus on the most basic scenario where each agent can participate in a bounded number of sharings. We present algorithms for optimizing utilitarian and egalitarian social welfare of allocations and for reducing the number of envious agents. In particular, we examine the computational complexity with respect to several natural parameters. Furthermore, we study cases with restricted social network structures and, among others, devise polynomial-time algorithms in path- and tree-like (hierarchical) social networks.

A recent report of Littmann published in the Communications of the ACM outlines the existence and the fatal impact of collusion rings in academic peer reviewing. We introduce and analyze the problem Cycle-Free Reviewing that aims at finding a review assignment without the following kind of collusion ring: A sequence of reviewers each reviewing a paper authored by the next reviewer in the sequence (with the last reviewer reviewing a paper of the first), thus creating a review cycle where each reviewer gives favorable reviews. As a result, all papers in that cycle have a high chance of acceptance independent of their respective scientific merit. We observe that review assignments computed using a standard Linear Programming approach typically admit many short review cycles. On the negative side, we show that Cycle-Free Reviewing is NP-hard in various restricted cases (i.e., when every author is qualified to review all papers and one wants to prevent that authors review each other's or their own papers or when every author has only one paper and is only qualified to review few papers). On the positive side, among others, we show that, in some realistic settings, an assignment without any review cycles of small length always exists. This result also gives rise to an efficient heuristic for computing (weighted) cycle-free review assignments, which we show to be of excellent quality in practice.

Given an initial resource allocation, where some agents may envy others or where a different distribution of resources might lead to higher social welfare, our goal is to improve the allocation without reassigning resources. We consider a sharing concept allowing resources being shared with social network neighbors of the resource owners. To this end, we introduce a formal model that allows a central authority to compute an optimal sharing between neighbors based on an initial allocation. Advocating this point of view, we focus on the most basic scenario where a resource may be shared by two neighbors in a social network and each agent can participate in a bounded number of sharings. We present algorithms for optimizing utilitarian and egalitarian social welfare of allocations and for reducing the number of envious agents. In particular, we examine the computational complexity with respect to several natural parameters. Furthermore, we study cases with restricted social network structures and, among others, devise polynomial-time algorithms in path- and tree-like (hierarchical) social networks.

Electing a single committee of a small size is a classical and well-understood voting situation. Being interested in a sequence of committees, we introduce two time-dependent multistage models based on simple scoring-based voting. Therein, we are given a sequence of voting profiles (stages) over the same set of agents and candidates, and our task is to find a small committee for each stage of high score. In the conservative model we additionally require that any two consecutive committees have a small symmetric difference. Analogously, in the revolutionary model we require large symmetric differences. We prove both models to be NP-hard even for a constant number of agents, and, based on this, initiate a parameterized complexity analysis for the most natural parameters and combinations thereof. Among other results, we prove both models to be in XP yet W[1]-hard regarding the number of stages, and that being revolutionary seems to be "easier" than being conservative.

We consider opinion diffusion for undirected networks with sequential updates when the opinions of the agents are single-peaked preference rankings. Our starting point is the study of preserving single-peakedness. We identify voting rules that, when given a single-peaked profile, output at least one ranking that is single peaked w.r.t. a single-peaked axis of the input. For such voting rules we show convergence to a stable state of the diffusion process that uses the voting rule as the agents' update rule. Further, we establish an efficient algorithm that maximises the spread of extreme opinions.

We use the "map of elections" approach of Szufa et al. (AAMAS 2020) to analyze several well-known vote distributions. For each of them, we give an explicit formula or an efficient algorithm for computing its frequency matrix, which captures the probability that a given candidate appears in a given position in a sampled vote. We use these matrices to draw the "skeleton map" of distributions, evaluate its robustness, and analyze its properties. We further develop a general and unified framework for learning the distribution of real-world preferences using the frequency matrices of established vote distributions.

The NP-hard Material Consumption Scheduling Problem and closely related problems have been thoroughly studied since the 1980's. Roughly speaking, the problem deals with minimizing the makespan when scheduling jobs that consume non-renewable resources. We focus on the single-machine case without preemption: from time to time, the resources of the machine are (partially) replenished, thus allowing for meeting a necessary pre-condition for processing further jobs, each of which having individual resource demands. We initiate a systematic exploration of the parameterized computational complexity landscape of the problem, providing parameterized tractability as well as intractability results. Doing so, we mainly investigate how parameters related to the resource supplies influence the computational complexity. Thereby, we get a deepened understanding of this fundamental scheduling problem.

We study the parameterized complexity of counting variants of Swap- and Shift-Bribery, focusing on the parameterizations by the number of swaps and the number of voters. Facing several computational hardness results, using sampling we show experimentally that Swap-Bribery offers a new approach to the robustness analysis of elections.

In their AAMAS 2020 paper, Szufa et al. presented a "map of elections" that visualizes a set of 800 elections generated from various statistical cultures. While similar elections are grouped together on this map, there is no obvious interpretation of the elections' positions. We provide such an interpretation by introducing four canonical “extreme” elections, acting as a compass on the map. We use them to analyze both a dataset provided by Szufa et al. and a number of real-life elections. In effect, we find a new parameterization of the Mallows model, based on measuring the expected swap distance from the central preference order, and show that it is useful for capturing real-life scenarios.

Abstract Shortlisting of candidates—selecting a group of “best” candidates—is a special case of multiwinner elections. We provide the first in-depth study of the computational complexity of strategic voting for shortlisting based on the perhaps most basic voting rule in this scenario, $$\ell $$ ℓ -Bloc (every voter approves $$\ell $$ ℓ candidates). In particular, we investigate the influence of several different group evaluation functions (e.g., egalitarian versus utilitarian) and tie-breaking mechanisms modeling pessimistic and optimistic manipulators. Among other things, we conclude that in an egalitarian setting strategic voting may indeed be computationally intractable regardless of the tie-breaking rule. Altogether, we provide a fairly comprehensive picture of the computational complexity landscape of this scenario.

We introduce successive committees elections. The point is that our new model additionally takes into account that “committee members” shall have a short term of office possibly over a consecutive time period (e.g., to limit the influence of elitist power cartels or to keep the social costs of overloading committees as small as possible) but at the same time overly frequent elections are to be avoided (e.g., for the sake of long-term planning). Thus, given voter preferences over a set of candidates, a desired committee size, a number of committees to be elected, and an upper bound on the number of committees that each candidate can participate in, the goal is to find a “best possible” series of committees representing the electorate. We show a sharp complexity dichotomy between computing series of committees of size at most two (mostly in polynomial time) and of committees of size at least three (mostly NP-hard). Depending on the voting rule, however, even for larger committee sizes we can spot some tractable cases.

Adaptivity to changing environments and constraints is key to success in modern society. We address this by proposing “incrementalized versions” of Stable Marriage and Stable Roommates. That is, we try to answer the following question: for both problems, what is the computational cost of adapting an existing stable matching after some of the preferences of the agents have changed. While doing so, we also model the constraint that the new stable matching shall be not too different from the old one. After formalizing these incremental versions, we provide a fairly comprehensive picture of the computational complexity landscape of Incremental Stable Marriage and Incremental Stable Roommates. To this end, we exploit the parameters “degree of change” both in the input (difference between old and new preference profile) and in the output (difference between old and new stable matching). We obtain both hardness and tractability results, in particular showing a fixed-parameter tractability result with respect to the parameter “distance between old and new stable matching”.

We extend the work of Skowron et al. (AIJ, 2016) by considering the parameterized complexity of the following problem. We are given a set of items and a set of agents, where each agent assigns an integer utility value to each item. The goal is to find a set of k items that these agents would collectively use. For each such collective set of items, each agent provides a score that can be described using an OWA (ordered weighted average) operator and we seek a set with the highest total score. We focus on the parameterization by the number of agents and we find numerous fixed-parameter tractability results (however, we also find some W[1]-hardness results). It turns out that most of our algorithms even apply to the setting where each agent has an integer weight.

Given a set of individuals qualifying or disqualifying each other, group identification is the task of identifying a socially qualified subgroup of individuals. Social qualification depends on the specific rule used to aggregate individual qualifications. The bribery problem in this context asks how many agents need to change their qualifications in order to change the outcome. Complementing previous results showing polynomial-time solvability or NP-hardness of bribery for various social rules in the constructive (aiming at making specific individuals socially qualified) or destructive (aiming at making specific individuals socially disqualified) setting, we provide a comprehensive picture of the parameterized computational complexity landscape. Conceptually, we also consider a more fine-grained concept of bribery cost, where we ask how many single qualifications need to be changed, and a more general bribery goal that combines the constructive and destructive setting.

In parliamentary elections, parties compete for a limited, typically fixed number of seats. We study the complexity of the following bribery-style problem: Given the distribution of votes among the parties, what is the smallest number of voters that need to be convinced to vote for our party, so that it gets a desired number of seats. We also run extensive experiments on real-world election data and measure the effectiveness of our method.

We consider the setting of asynchronous opinion diffusion with majority threshold: given a social network with each agent assigned to one opinion, an agent will update its opinion if more than half of its neighbors agree on a different opinion. The stabilized final outcome highly depends on the sequence in which agents update their opinion. We are interested in optimistic sequences---sequences that maximize the spread of a chosen opinion. We complement known results for two opinions where optimistic sequences can be computed in time and length linear in the number of agents. We analyze upper and lower bounds on the length of optimistic sequences, showing quadratic bounds in the general and linear bounds in the acyclic case. Moreover, we show that in networks with more than two opinions determining a spread-maximizing sequence becomes intractable; surprisingly, already with three opinions the intractability results hold in highly restricted cases, e.g., when each agent has at most three neighbors, when looking for a short sequence, or when we aim for approximate solutions.

We initiate the study of external manipulations in Stable Marriage by considering several manipulative actions as well as several manipulation goals. For instance, one goal is to make sure that a given pair of agents is matched in a stable solution, and this may be achieved by the manipulative action of reordering some agents' preference lists. We present a comprehensive study of the computational complexity of all problems arising in this way. We find several polynomial-time solvable cases as well as NP-hard ones. For the NP-hard cases, focusing on the natural parameter "budget" (that is, the number of manipulative actions one is allowed to perform), we also conduct a parameterized complexity analysis and encounter mostly parameterized hardness results.

The classical Stable Roommates problem is to decide whether there exists a matching of an even number of agents such that no two agents which are not matched to each other would prefer to be with each other rather than with their respectively assigned partners. We investigate Stable Roommates with complete (i.e., every agent can be matched with any other agent) or incomplete preferences, with ties (i.e., two agents are considered of equal value to some agent) or without ties. It is known that in general allowing ties makes the problem NP-complete. We provide algorithms for Stable Roommates that are, compared to those in the literature, more efficient when the input preferences are complete and have some structural property, such as being narcissistic, single-peaked, and single-crossing. However, when the preferences are incomplete and have ties, we show that being single-peaked and single-crossing does not reduce the computational complexity-Stable Roommates remains NP-complete.

We provide an experimental study of committees that achieve (proportional/extended) justified representation (JR/PJR/EJR). In particular, we ask how many such committees exist and how varied they are in terms of voter satisfaction and coverage. We find that under many natural distributions of preferences a large fraction of randomly selected JR committees also provide PJR and EJR. Further, we find that the sets of JR committees for our elections are very varied and include both high-quality ones and not-so-appealing ones.

We continue and extend previous work on the parameterized complexity analysis of the NP-hard Stable Roommates with Ties and Incomplete Lists problem, thereby strengthening earlier results both on the side of parameterized hardness as well as on the side of fixed-parameter tractability. Other than for its famous sister problem Stable Marriage which focuses on a bipartite scenario, Stable Roommates with Incomplete Lists allows for arbitrary acceptability graphs whose edges specify the possible matchings of each two agents (agents are represented by graph vertices). Herein, incomplete lists and ties reflect the fact that in realistic application scenarios the agents cannot bring all other agents into a linear order. Among our main contributions is to show that it is W[1]-hard to compute a maximum-cardinality stable matching for acceptability graphs of bounded treedepth, bounded tree-cut width, and bounded feedback vertex number (these are each time the respective parameters). However, if we "only" ask for perfect stable matchings or the mere existence of a stable matching, then we obtain fixed-parameter tractability with respect to tree-cut width but not with respect to treedepth. On the positive side, we also provide fixed-parameter tractability results for the parameter feedback edge set number.

There has been intensive work on the parameterized complexity of the typically NP-hard task to edit undirected graphs into graphs fulfilling certain given vertex degree constraints. In this work, we lift the investigations to the case of directed graphs; herein, we focus on arc insertions. To this end, we develop a general two-stage framework which consists of efficiently solving a problem-specific number problem and transferring its solution to a solution for the graph problem by applying flow computations. In this way, we obtain fixed-parameter tractability and polynomial kernelizability results, with the central parameter being the maximum vertex in- or outdegree of the output digraph. Although there are certain similarities with the much better studied undirected case, the flow computation used in the directed case seems not to work for the undirected case while f -factor computations as used in the undirected case seem not to work for the directed case.

We develop a model of multiwinner elections that combines performance-based measures of the quality of the committee (such as, e.g., Borda scores of the committee members) with diversity constraints. Specifically, we assume that the candidates have certain attributes (such as being a male or a female, being junior or senior, etc.) and the goal is to elect a committee that, on the one hand, has as high a score regarding a given performance measure, but that, on the other hand, meets certain requirements (e.g., of the form "at least 30% of the committee members are junior candidates and at least 40% are females"). We analyze the computational complexity of computing winning committees in this model, obtaining polynomial-time algorithms (exact and approximate) and NP-hardness results. We focus on several natural classes of voting rules and diversity constraints.

Consider an important meeting to be held in a team-based organization. Taking availability constraints into account, an online scheduling poll is being used in order to decide upon the exact time of the meeting. Decisions are to be taken during the meeting, therefore each team would like to maximize its relative attendance (i.e. the proportional number of its team members attending the meeting). We introduce a corresponding game, where each team can declare a lower total availability in the scheduling poll in order to improve its relative attendance—the pay-off. We are especially interested in situations where teams can form coalitions. We provide an efficient algorithm that, given a coalition, finds an optimal way for each team in a coalition to improve its pay-off. In contrast, we show that deciding whether such a coalition exists is NP-hard. We also study the existence of Nash equilibria: Finding Nash equilibria for various small sizes of teams and coalitions can be done in polynomial time while it is coNP-hard if the coalition size is unbounded.

We consider opinion diffusion in binary influence networks, where at each step one or more agents update their opinions so as to be in agreement with the majority of their neighbors. We consider several ways of manipulating the majority opinion in a stable outcome, such as bribing agents, adding/deleting links, and changing the order of updates, and investigate the computational complexity of the associated problems, identifying tractable and intractable cases.

We study computational problems for two popular parliamentary voting procedures: the amendment procedure and the successive procedure. They work in multiple stages where the result of each stage may influence the result of the next stage. Both procedures proceed according to a given linear order of the alternatives, an agenda. We obtain the following results for both voting procedures: On the one hand, deciding whether one can make a specific alternative win by reporting insincere preferences by the fewest number of voters, the Manipulation problem, or whether there is a suitable ordering of the agenda, the Agenda Control problem, takes polynomial time. On the other hand, our experimental studies with real-world data indicate that most preference profiles cannot be manipulated by only few voters and a successful agenda control is typically impossible. If the voters' preferences are incomplete, then deciding whether an alternative can possibly win is NP-hard for both procedures. Whilst deciding whether an alternative necessarily wins is coNP-hard for the amendment procedure, it is polynomial-time solvable for the successive procedure.

We study the (parameterized) complexity of Shift Bribery for multiwinner voting rules. We focus on the SNTV, Bloc, k-Borda, and Chamberlin-Courant rules, as well as on approximate variants of the Chamberlin-Courant rule, since the original rule is NP-hard to compute. We show that Shift Bribery tends to be significantly harder in the multiwinner setting than in the single-winner one by showing settings where Shift Bribery is easy in the single-winner cases, but is hard (and hard to approximate) in the multiwinner ones. We show that the non-monotonicity of those rules which are based on approximation algorithms for the Chamberlin--Courant rule sometimes affects the complexity of Shift Bribery.

We study the complexity of a combinatorial variant of the Shift Bribery problem in elections. In the standard Shift Bribery problem, we are given an election where each voter has a preference order over the set of candidates and where an outside agent, the briber, can pay each voter to rank the briber's favorite candidate a given number of positions higher. The goal is to ensure the victory of the briber's preferred candidate. The combinatorial variant of the problem, introduced in this paper, models settings where it is possible to affect the position of the preferred candidate in multiple votes, either positively or negatively, with a single bribery action. This variant of the problem is particularly interesting in the context of large-scale campaign management problems (which, from the technical side, are modeled as bribery problems). We show that, in general, the combinatorial variant of the problem is highly intractable; specifically, NP-hard, hard in the parameterized sense, and hard to approximate. Nevertheless, we provide parameterized algorithms and approximation algorithms for natural restricted cases.

We introduce a graph-theoretic vertex dissolution model that applies to a number of redistribution scenarios, such as gerrymandering in political districting or work balancing in an online situation. The central aspect of our model is the deletion of certain vertices and the redistribution of their load to neighboring vertices in a completely balanced way. We investigate how the underlying graph structure, the knowledge of which vertices should be deleted, and the relation between old and new vertex loads influence the computational complexity of the underlying graph problems. Our results establish a clear borderline between tractable and intractable cases.

In the Shift Bribery problem, we are given an election (based on preference orders), a preferred candidate p, and a budget. The goal is to ensure that p wins by shifting p higher in some voters' preference orders. However, each such shift request comes at a price (depending on the voter and on the extent of the shift) and we must not exceed the given budget. We study the parameterized computational complexity of Shift Bribery with respect to a number of parameters (pertaining to the nature of the solution sought and the size of the election) and several classes of price functions. When we parameterize Shift Bribery by the number of affected voters, then for each of our voting rules (Borda, Maximin, Copeland) the problem is W[2]-hard. If, instead, we parameterize by the number of positions by which p is shifted in total, then the problem is fixed-parameter tractable for Borda and Maximin, and is W[1]-hard for Copeland. If we parameterize by the budget for the cost of shifting, then the results depend on the price function class. We also show that Shift Bribery tends to be tractable when parameterized by the number of voters, but that the results for the number of candidates are more enigmatic.

Assume that each of n voters may or may not approve each of m issues. If an agent (the lobby) may influence up to k voters, then the central question of the NP-hard Lobbying problem is whether the lobby can choose the voters to be influenced so that as a result each issue gets a majority of approvals. This problem can be modeled as a simple matrix modification problem: Can one replace k rows of a binary n x m-matrix by k all-1 rows such that each column in the resulting matrix has a majority of 1s? Significantly extending on previous work that showed parameterized intractability (W[2]-completeness) with respect to the number k of modified rows, we study how natural parameters such as n, m, k, or the "maximum number of 1s missing for any column to have a majority of 1s" (referred to as "gap value g") govern the computational complexity of Lobbying. Among other results, we prove that Lobbying is fixed-parameter tractable for parameter m and provide a greedy logarithmic-factor approximation algorithm which solves Lobbying even optimally if m < 5. We also show empirically that this greedy algorithm performs well on general instances. As a further key result, we prove that Lobbying is LOGSNP-complete for constant values g>0, thus providing a first natural complete problem from voting for this complexity class of limited nondeterminism.

We extend work by Christian et al. [Review of Economic Design 2007] on lobbying in multiple referenda by first providing a more fine-grained analysis of the computational complexity of the NP-complete Lobbying problem. Herein, given a binary matrix, the columns represent issues to vote on and the rows correspond to voters making a binary vote on each issue. An issue is approved if a majority of votes has a 1 in the corresponding column. The goal is to get all issues approved by modifying a minimum number of rows to all-1-rows. In our multivariate complexity analysis, we present a more holistic view on the nature of the computational complexity of Lobbying, providing both (parameterized) tractability and intractability results, depending on various problem parameterizations to be adopted. Moreover, we show non-existence results concerning efficient and effective preprocessing for Lobbying and introduce natural variants such as Restricted Lobbying and Partial Lobbying.