Peter_de_Blanc comments on Arrow's Theorem is a Lie - Less Wrong

27 Post author: alyssavance 24 October 2009 08:46PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (62)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Peter_de_Blanc 25 October 2009 01:37:47PM 3 points [-]

I wrote a blog post a while back about equilibrium strategies in elections. I defined a "cabal equilibrium" as one in which, not only does no single player wish to change strategies, but no group of players wishes to change strategies together.

For example, (D,D) is not a cabal equilibrium in PD, because both players would prefer to change strategies together to (C,C). But (C,C) is not a cabal equilibrium either, because either player would prefer to change to D. PD has no cabal equilibria.

Elections have cabal equilibria iff there's a Condorcet winner, and a cabal equilibrium elects the Condorcet winner.

Comment author: feanor1600 29 October 2010 03:46:42PM 0 points [-]

It sounds like you rediscovered the "Core".