arXiv++ Combinatorics

The game of best choice (or "secretary problem") is a model for making an irrevocable decision among a fixed number of candidate choices that are presented sequentially in random order, one at a time. Because the classically optimal solution is known to reject an initial sequence of candidates, a paradox emerges from the fact that candidates have an incentive to position themselves immediately after this cutoff which challenges the assumption that candidates arrive in uniformly random order. One way to resolve this is to consider games for which every (reasonable) strategy results in the same probability of success. In this work, we classify these "strategy-indifferent" games of best choice. It turns out that the probability of winning such a game is essentially the reciprocal of the expected number of left-to-right maxima in the full collection of candidate rank orderings. We present some examples of these games based on avoiding permutation patterns of size 3, which involves computing the distribution of left-to-right maxima in each of these pattern classes.

The semantic paradoxes are associated with self-reference or referential circularity. However, there are infinitary versions of the paradoxes, such as Yablo's paradox, that do not involve this form of circularity. It remains an open question what relations of reference between collections of sentences afford the structure necessary for paradoxicality -- these are the so-called "dangerous" directed graphs. Building on Rabern, et. al (2013) we reformulate this problem in terms of fixed points of certain functions, thereby boiling it down to get a purely mathematical problem.

Arrow's Theorem concerns a fundamental problem in social choice theory: given the individual preferences of members of a group, how can they be aggregated to form rational group preferences? Arrow showed that in an election between three or more candidates, there are situations where any voting rule satisfying a small list of natural "fairness" axioms must produce an apparently irrational intransitive outcome. Furthermore, quantitative versions of Arrow's Theorem in the literature show that when voters choose rankings in an i.i.d.\ fashion, the outcome is intransitive with non-negligible probability. It is natural to ask if such a quantitative version of Arrow's Theorem holds for non-i.i.d.\ models. To answer this question, we study Arrow's Theorem under a natural non-i.i.d.\ model of voters inspired by canonical models in statistical physics; indeed, a version of this model was previously introduced by Raffaelli and Marsili in the physics literature. This model has a parameter, temperature, that prescribes the correlation between different voters. We show that the behavior of Arrow's Theorem in this model undergoes a striking phase transition: in the entire high temperature regime of the model, a Quantitative Arrow's Theorem holds showing that the probability of paradox for any voting rule satisfying the axioms is non-negligible; this is tight because the probability of paradox under pairwise majority goes to zero when approaching the critical temperature, and becomes exponentially small in the number of voters beyond it. We prove this occurs in another natural model of correlated voters and conjecture this phenomena is quite general.

Given a graph sequence $\{G_n\}_{n \geq 1}$ denote by $T_3(G_n)$ the number of monochromatic triangles in a uniformly random coloring of the vertices of $G_n$ with $c \geq 2$ colors. This arises as a generalization of the birthday paradox, where $G_n$ corresponds to a friendship network and $T_3(G_n)$ counts the number of triples of friends with matching birthdays. In this paper we prove a central limit theorem (CLT) for $T_3(G_n)$ with explicit error rates. The proof involves constructing a martingale difference sequence by carefully ordering the vertices of $G_n$, based on a certain combinatorial score function, and using a quantitive version of the martingale CLT. We then relate this error term to the well-known fourth moment phenomenon, which, interestingly, holds only when the number of colors $c \geq 5$. We also show that the convergence of the fourth moment is necessary to obtain a Gaussian limit for any $c \geq 2$, which, together with the above result, implies that the fourth-moment condition characterizes the limiting normal distribution of $T_3(G_n)$, whenever $c \geq 5$. Finally, to illustrate the promise of our approach, we include an alternative proof of the CLT for the number of monochromatic edges, which provides quantitative rates for the results obtained in Bhattacharya et al. (2017).

The Kemeny's constant $κ(G)$ of a connected undirected graph $G$ can be interpreted as the expected transit time between two randomly chosen vertices for the Markov chain associated with $G$. In certain cases, inserting a new edge into $G$ has the counter-intuitive effect of increasing the value of $κ(G)$. In the current work we identify a large class of graphs exhibiting this "paradoxical" behavior - namely, those graphs having a pair of twin pendant vertices. We also investigate the occurrence of this phenomenon in random graphs, showing that almost all connected planar graphs are paradoxical. To establish these results, we make use of a connection between the Kemeny's constant and the resistance distance of graphs.

We study traffic networks with multiple origin-destination pairs, relaxing the simplifying assumption of agents having complete knowledge of the network structure. We identify a ubiquitous class of networks, i.e., rings, for which we can safely increase the agents' knowledge without affecting their own overall performance -- known as immunity to Informational Braess' Paradox -- closing a gap in the literature. We also extend our performance measure to include the welfare of all agents, showing that under this measure IBP is a widespread phenomenon and no network is immune to it.

In this review paper I present two geometric constructions of distinguished nature, one is over the field of complex numbers $\mathbb{C}$ and the other one is over the two elements field $\mathbb{F}_2$. Both constructions have been employed in the past fifteen years to describe two quantum paradoxes or two resources of quantum information: entanglement of pure multipartite systems on one side and contextuality on the other. Both geometric constructions are linked to representation of semi-simple Lie groups/algebras. To emphasize this aspect one explains on one hand how well-known results in representation theory allows one to see all the classification of entanglement classes of various tripartite quantum systems ($3$ qubits, $3$ fermions, $3$ bosonic qubits...) in a unified picture. On the other hand, one also shows how some weight diagrams of simple Lie groups are encapsulated in the geometry which deals with the commutation relations of the generalized $N$-Pauli group.

We study a generalisation of Simpson reversal (also known as Simpson's paradox or the Yule-Simpson effect) to $2 \times 2 \times 2$ contingency tables and characterise the cases for which it can and cannot occur with two combinatorial-geometric lemmas. We also present a conjecture based on some computational experiments on the expected likelihood of such events.

We consider the problem of selecting an $n$-member committee made up of one of $m$ candidates from each of $n$ distinct departments. Using an algebraic approach, we analyze positional voting procedures, including the Borda count, as $\mathbb{Q}S_m \wr S_n$-module homomorphisms. In particular, we decompose the spaces of voter preferences and election results into simple $\mathbb{Q}S_m \wr S_n$-submodules and apply Schur's Lemma to determine the structure of the information lost in the voting process. We conclude with a voting paradox result, showing that for sufficiently different weighting vectors, applying the associated positional voting procedures to the same set of votes can yield arbitrarily different election outcomes.

We describe several experimental results obtained in four candidates social choice elections. These include the Condorcet and Borda paradoxes, as well as the Condorcet efficiency of plurality voting with runoff. The computations are done by Normaliz. It finds precise probabilities as volumes of polytopes and counting functions encoded as Ehrhart series of polytopes.

The famous Braess paradox describes the following phenomenon: It might happen that the improvement of resources, like building a new street within a congested network, may in fact lead to larger costs for the players in an equilibrium. In this paper we consider general nonatomic congestion games and give a characterization of the maximal combinatorial property of strategy spaces for which Braess paradox does not occur. In a nutshell, bases of matroids are exactly this maximal structure. We prove our characterization by two novel sensitivity results for convex separable optimization problems over polymatroid base polyhedra which may be of independent interest.

We study how the spectral gap of the normalized Laplacian of a random graph changes when an edge is added to or removed from the graph. There are known examples of graphs where, perhaps counterintuitively, adding an edge can decrease the spectral gap, a phenomenon that is analogous to Braess's paradox in traffic networks. We show that this is often the case in random graphs in a strong sense. More precisely, we show that for typical instances of Erdős-Rényi random graphs $G(n,p)$ with constant edge density $p \in (0,1)$, the addition of a random edge will decrease the spectral gap with positive probability, strictly bounded away from zero. To do this, we prove a new delocalization result for eigenvectors of the Laplacian of $G(n,p)$, which might be of independent interest.

The classical paradox of social choice theory asserts that there is no fair way to deterministically select a winner in an election among more than two candidates; the only definite collective preferences are between individual pairs of candidates. Combinatorially, one may summarize this information with a graph-theoretic tournament on N vertices (one per candidate), placing an edge from U to V if U would beat V in an election between only those two candidates (no ties are permitted). One well-studied procedure for selecting a winner is to specify a complete binary tree whose leaves are labeled by the candidates, and evaluate it by running pairwise elections between the pairs of leaves, sending the winners to successive rounds of pairwise elections which ultimately terminate with a single winner. This structure is called a voting tree. Much research has investigated which functions on tournaments are computable in this way. Fischer, Procaccia, and Samorodnitsky quantitatively studied the computability of the Copeland rule, which returns a vertex of maximum out-degree in the given tournament. Perhaps surprisingly, the best previously known voting tree could only guarantee a returned out-degree of at least log_2 N, despite the fact that every tournament has a vertex of degree at least (N-1)/2. In this paper, we present three constructions, the first of which substantially improves this guarantee to Θ(sqrt{N}). The other two demonstrate the richness of the voting tree universe, with a tree that resists manipulation, and a tree which implements arithmetic modulo three.

The classical network configuration introduced by Braess in 1968 is of fundamental significance because Valiant and Roughgarden showed in 2006 that `the "global" behaviour of an equilibrium flow in a large random network is similar to that in Braess' original four-node example'. In this paper, a natural generalisation of Braess' network is introduced and conditions for the occurrence of Braess' paradox are formulated for the generalised network. The Braess' paradox has been studied mainly in the context of the classical problem introduced by Braess and his colleagues, assuming a certain type of networks. Specifically, two pairs of links in those networks are assumed to have the same volume-delay functions. The occurrence of Braess' paradox for this specific case of network symmetry was investigated by Pas and Principio in 1997. Such a symmetry is not common in real-life networks because the parameters of volume-delay functions are associated with roads physical and functional characteristics, which typically differ from one link to another (e.g. roads in networks are of different length). Our research provides an extension of previous studies on Braess' paradox by considering arbitrary volume-delay functions, i.e. symmetry properties are not assumed for any of the network's links and the occurrence of Braess' paradox is studied for a general configuration.

A large amount of literature in social choice theory deals with quantifying the probability of certain election outcomes. One way of computing the probability of a specific voting situation under the Impartial Anonymous Culture assumption is via counting integral points in polyhedra. Here, Ehrhart theory can help, but unfortunately the dimension and complexity of the involved polyhedra grows rapidly with the number of candidates. However, if we exploit available polyhedral symmetries, some computations become possible that previously were infeasible. We show this in three well known examples: Condorcet's paradox, Condorcet efficiency of plurality voting and in Plurality voting vs Plurality Runoff.

The birthday paradox states that there is at least a 50% chance that some two out of twenty-three randomly chosen people will share the same birth date. The calculation for this problem assumes that all birth dates are equally likely. We consider the following two modifications of this question. If the distribution of birthdays is non-uniform, does that increase or decrease the probability of matching birth dates? Further, what if we focus on birthdays shared by some particular pairs rather than any two people. Does a non-uniform distribution on birth dates increase or decrease the probability of a matching pair? In this paper we present our results in this generalized setting. We use some results and methods due to Sokal concerning bounds on the roots of chromatic polynomials to prove our results.

Hamilton's method (also called method of largest remainder) is a natural and common method to distribute seats proportionally between states (or parties) in a parliament. In USA it has been abandoned due to some drawbacks, in particular the possibility of the Alabama paradox, but it is still in use in many other countries. In this paper we give, under certain assumptions, a closed formula for the asymptotic probability, as the number of seats tends to infinity, that the Alabama paradox occurs given the vector p_1,...,p_m of relative sizes of the states. From the theorem we deduce a number of consequences. For example it is shown that the expected number of states that will suffer from the Alabama paradox is asymptotically bounded above by 1/e. For random (uniformly distributed) relative sizes p_1,...,p_m the expected number of states to suffer from the Alabama paradox converges to slightly more than a third of this, or approximately 0.335/e=0.123, as m tends to infinity. We leave open the generalization of our formula to all possible (in particular rational) p_1,...,p_m.

In [G. Kalai, A Fourier-theoretic Perspective on the Condorcet Paradox and Arrow's Theorem, Adv. in Appl. Math. 29(3) (2002), pp. 412--426], Kalai investigated the probability of a rational outcome for a generalized social welfare function (GSWF) on three alternatives, when the individual preferences are uniform and independent. In this paper we generalize Kalai's results to a broader class of distributions of the individual preferences, and obtain new lower bounds on the probability of a rational outcome in several classes of GSWFs. In particular, we show that if the GSWF is monotone and balanced and the distribution of the preferences is uniform, then the probability of a rational outcome is at least 3/4, proving a conjecture raised by Kalai. The tools used in the paper are analytic: the Fourier-Walsh expansion of Boolean functions on the discrete cube, properties of the Bonamie-Beckner noise operator, and the FKG inequality.

Arrow's Impossibility Theorem states that any constitution which satisfies Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives (IIA) and Unanimity and is not a Dictator has to be non-transitive. In this paper we study quantitative versions of Arrow theorem. Consider $n$ voters who vote independently at random, each following the uniform distribution over the 6 rankings of 3 alternatives. Arrow's theorem implies that any constitution which satisfies IIA and Unanimity and is not a dictator has a probability of at least $6^{-n}$ for a non-transitive outcome. When $n$ is large, $6^{-n}$ is a very small probability, and the question arises if for large number of voters it is possible to avoid paradoxes with probability close to 1. Here we give a negative answer to this question by proving that for every $\eps > 0$, there exists a $δ= δ(\eps) > 0$, which depends on $\eps$ only, such that for all $n$, and all constitutions on 3 alternatives, if the constitution satisfies: The IIA condition. For every pair of alternatives $a,b$, the probability that the constitution ranks $a$ above $b$ is at least $\eps$. For every voter $i$, the probability that the social choice function agrees with a dictatorship on $i$ at most $1-\eps$. Then the probability of a non-transitive outcome is at least $δ$.

We show a Birthday Paradox for self-intersections of Markov chains with uniform stationary distribution. As an application, we analyze Pollard's Rho algorithm for finding the discrete logarithm in a cyclic group $G$ and find that if the partition in the algorithm is given by a random oracle, then with high probability a collision occurs in $Θ(\sqrt{|G|})$ steps. Moreover, for the parallelized distinguished points algorithm on $J$ processors we find that $Θ(\sqrt{|G|}/J)$ steps suffices. These are the first proofs of the correct order bounds which do not assume that every step of the algorithm produces an i.i.d. sample from $G$.