Arrow’s Theorem

Common Core Mathematical Practices

MP.2 Reason abstractly and quantitatively

MP.3 Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others.

➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵

Learning Objectives

Students will be able to...

➵ Identify deirable and undesirable characteristics of a fair election.

➵ Analyze ranked choice voting scenarios and identify the Pros and Cons of a ranked choice voting systems

➵ Describe the limitiations of ranked choice voting illuminated by Arrow's Theorem

➵ Identify the different characteristics of ranked choice voting systems

➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵

Discussion Questions

➵ What are desirable characteristics in a voting system?

➵ What does a fair voting system look like? Do all votes count the same? Should one person cast one vote for one candidates, or should they rank the candidates?

➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵

What are some bad voting systems?

Some Examples

Monarchy

A monarchy is a voting system where one candidate always wins, regardless of votes.

Dictatorship

A dictatorship is a voting system where one voter gets to pick the winner–even if everyone else picks a different candidate, that voter's choice wins.

What are features of a good voting system?

Anonymity

A voting system is anonymous if it treats every voter equally.

Ex. A dictatorship, where one candidate picks the winner, isn't anonymous because one voter has more power.

Neutrality

A voting system is neutral if it treats every candidate equally–a monarchy isn't neutral because one candidate is guaranteed to win

Monotonicity

A voting system is monotone if more people voting for the winner or fewer people voting for the loser doesn't change the outcome: if doing better in the election causes you to lose, the system isn't monotone!

Pareto Criterion

A voting system satisfies Pareto Criterion if, when everyone prefers Candidate A to Candidate B, Candidate B should not win.

When wouldn't this happen?

Consider a voting system where we first compare candidates A and B, then compare the winner to candidate C, and compare that winner to candidate D. Now, consider that the voters vote as below. Note that everyone likes A better than D.

Candidate B beats candidate A (a candidate wins a match up by being ranked higher than its opponent by more voters), then candidate C beats candidate B, and candidate D beats candidate C. So, even though everyone liked A better, Candidate D wins! This is an example of Pareto Criterion gone wrong.

Video Demonstration of a Voting System where Pareto Criterion fails

Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives

A voting system satisfies Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives (IIA) when only voters' preferences between A and B determines which of A and B is ranked higher.

Walk Through of IIA with Examples

Example: Michelle Kwan at the 1995 Figure Skating World Championship

Before Michelle Kwan skated, rankings were:

First Place: Chen Lu (China)

Second Place: Nicole Bobek (USA)

Third Place: Surya Bonaly (France)


Rankings after Michelle Kwan skated:

First place: Chen Lu (China)

Second Place: Surya Bonaly (France)

Third Place: Nicole Bobek (USA)

Fourth Place: Michelle Kwan (USA)

Note that second and third places switched after Kwan skated despite her placing fourth!

This is an example of IIA failure--in other words, the judge's preferences of Bonaly and Bobek changed from an irrelevant alternative (Kwan's skating).

➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵

Kenneth Arrow

➵American Economist who lived from 1921-2017

➵Professor at Stanford and Harvard

➵Won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1972 alongside John Hicks

More About Kenneth Arrow

Arrow's Impossibility Theorem:

A ranked voting systems where voters pick one candidate cannot satisfy Pareto's Criterion and Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives without being a dictatorship.

What does this mean?

No traditional ranked voting system is perfect–all of them are vulnerable to at least one of these flaws.

A Semi-Simple Arrow's Proof Explanation

Arrow's Theorem Proof

Further Arrow's Theorem Proofs

“Most systems are not going to work badly all of the time. All I proved is that all can work badly at times.”

-Kenneth Arrow

Example: Voting Systems Simulation

In this example, we will see how voting systems meet or fail to meet the Pareto Criterion and Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives.

➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵

Closing Questions/Wrap Up

Arrow proves that for ranked choice systems to satisfy both the IIA and Pareto, a system must be a dictatorship.

    • Assuming we don't want a dictatorship, which criterion would you give up? (Which is more important, IIA or Pareto?)

    • Is democracy/non-dictatorship a workable voting system if it cannot satisfy IIA and Pareto?

    • How has learning about Arrow's Theorem changed your views on what makes a good election?

    • Are there voting systems that avoid the issues from Arrow's Theorem? (Hint: Cardinal Voting Systems)

➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵ ➵

Further Exploration

Kenneth Arrow discusses his early education and the appeal of probability theory, his efforts during World War II to improve flight routes by calculating wind patterns (20:26), how the Impossibility Theorem was born (36:15), and why his theories on health “changed the whole texture of how people thought about the problem” (43:15).

Katie Adler / Gabrielle Shlikas / Sophia Harrison