Metric Distortion Bounds for Randomized Social Choice
Moses Charikar, Prasanna Ramakrishnan
Abstract
Consider the following social choice problem. Suppose we have a set of n voters and m candidates that lie in a metric space. The goal is to design a mechanism to choose a candidate whose average distance to the voters is as small as possible. However, the mechanism does not get direct access to the metric space. Instead, it gets each voter's ordinal ranking of the candidates by distance. Given only this partial information, what is the smallest worst-case approximation ratio (known as the distortion) that a mechanism can guarantee?
A simple example shows that no deterministic mechanism can guarantee distortion better than 3, and no randomized mechanism can guarantee distortion better than 2. It has been conjectured that both of these lower bounds are optimal, and recently, Gkatzelis, Halpern, and Shah proved this conjecture for deterministic mechanisms. We disprove the conjecture for randomized mechanisms for m ≥ 3 by constructing elections for which no randomized mechanism can guarantee distortion better than 2.0261 for m = 3, 2.0496 for m = 4, up to 2.1126 as m → ∞. We obtain our lower bounds by identifying a class of simple metrics that appear to capture much of the hardness of the problem, and we show that any randomized mechanism must have high distortion on one of these metrics. We provide a nearly matching upper bound for this restricted class of metrics as well. Finally, we conjecture that these bounds give the optimal distortion for every m, and provide a proof for m = 3, thereby resolving that case.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 4494655f-828f-4d6c-9f87-d0eace4b2f0eCited by top-tier papers9
- The Metric Distortion of Multiwinner VotingIoannis Caragiannis, Nisarg Shah, Alexandros A. VoudourisAAAI 2022 · 49 citations
- Don't Roll the Dice, Ask Twice: The Two-Query Distortion of Matching Problems and BeyondGeorgios Amanatidis, Georgios Birmpas, Aris Filos-Ratsikas, Alexandros A. VoudourisNeurIPS 2022 · 19 citations
- Breaking the Metric Voting Distortion BarrierMoses Charikar, Kangning Wang, Prasanna Ramakrishnan, Hongxun WuSODA 2024 · 10 citations
- Low-Distortion Clustering with Ordinal and Limited Cardinal InformationJakob Burkhardt, Ioannis Caragiannis, Karl Fehrs, Matteo Russo et al.AAAI 2024 · 8 citations
- Tight Bounds on the Distortion of Randomized and Deterministic Distributed VotingMohammad Ali Abam, Davoud Kareshki, Marzie Nilipour, Mohammad Hossein Paydar et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 3 citations
Builds on3
- Communication, Distortion, and Randomness in Metric VotingDavid KempeAAAI 2020 · 45 citations
- Resolving the Optimal Metric Distortion ConjectureVasilis Gkatzelis, Daniel Halpern, Nisarg ShahFOCS 2020 · 44 citations
- An Analysis Framework for Metric Voting based on LP DualityDavid KempeAAAI 2020 · 37 citations
Related papers
- Improved Metric Distortion via Threshold ApprovalsElliot Anshelevich, Aris Filos-Ratsikas, Christopher Jerrett, Alexandros A. VoudourisAAAI 2024 · 10 citations
- Bi-Criteria Metric DistortionKiarash Banihashem, Diptarka Chakraborty, Shayan Chashm Jahan, Iman Gholami et al.ICLR 2026
- Metric Distortion of Small-Group DeliberationAshish Goel, Mohak Goyal, Kamesh MunagalaSTOC 2025 · 1 citation
- Favorite-Candidate Voting for Eliminating the Least Popular Candidate in a Metric SpaceXujin Chen, Minming Li, Chenhao WangAAAI 2020 · 16 citations
- Metric Distortion of Line-up Elections: The Right Person for the Right JobChristopher Jerrett, Yue Han, Elliot AnshelevichAAAI 2025
