Justified representation in approval-based committee voting, Social Choice and Welfare, vol.103, issue.1???2, pp.461-485, 2017. ,
DOI : 10.1023/A:1005082925477
Ties matter: Complexity of manipulation when tie-breaking with a random vote, Proc. of 27th AAAI Conference, pp.74-80, 2013. ,
How to choose a non-controversial list with k names, Social Choice and Welfare, vol.48, issue.1, pp.79-96, 2008. ,
DOI : 10.1017/CCOL052139015X
On the Computation of Fully Proportional Representation, SSRN Electronic Journal, vol.47, pp.475-519, 2013. ,
DOI : 10.2139/ssrn.1952497
Consensus rules for committee elections, Mathematical Social Sciences, vol.35, issue.3, pp.219-232, 1998. ,
DOI : 10.1016/S0165-4896(97)00033-4
Mathematics and Democracy: Designing Better Voting and Fair-Division Procedures, 2008. ,
DOI : 10.1515/9781400835591
URL : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2008.05.013
A minimax procedure for electing committees, Public Choice, vol.9, issue.2, pp.401-420, 2005. ,
DOI : 10.1257/jep.9.1.39
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00119026
How to elect a representative committee using approval balloting, Studies in Choice and Welfare), pp.83-95, 2006. ,
Normaliz: Algorithms for rational cones and ane monoids, 2017. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2010.01.031
URL : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalgebra.2010.01.031
Computations of volumes and Ehrhart series in four candidates elections. Working paper, 2017. ,
Which scoring rule maximizes Condorcet eciency under IAC? Theory and Decision, pp.145-185, 2005. ,
DOI : 10.1007/s11238-005-6594-1
Representative Deliberations and Representative Decisions: Proportional Representation and the Borda Rule, American Political Science Review, vol.47, issue.03, pp.718-733, 1983. ,
DOI : 10.1086/292250
The $$q$$ q -majority efficiency of positional rules, Theory and Decision, vol.30, issue.1, pp.31-49, 2015. ,
DOI : 10.1007/s00355-007-0236-1
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00914907
Prudent k-choice functions: properties and algorithms, Mathematical Social Sciences, vol.26, issue.1, pp.63-77, 1993. ,
DOI : 10.1016/0165-4896(93)90012-8
Strategic manipulability of self-selective social choice rules, Annals of Operations Research, vol.54, issue.4, pp.347-376, 2015. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2007.05.003
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01136401
Multi-winner scoring election methods: Condorcet consistency and paradoxes, Public Choice, vol.28, issue.2, pp.97-116, 2016. ,
DOI : 10.1137/0128067
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01285526
The true impact of voting rule selection on Condorcet eciency, Economics Bulletin, vol.35, pp.2418-2426, 2015. ,
Borda???s Paradox with weighted scoring rules, Social Choice and Welfare, vol.2, issue.1, pp.121-136, 2012. ,
DOI : 10.1007/BF01213253
An example of probability computations under the IAC assumption: The stability of scoring rules, Mathematical Social Sciences, vol.64, issue.1, pp.57-66, 2012. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2011.12.005
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00667660
The principles of parliamentary representation, 1884. ,
L (1876) A Method of Taking Votes on More than Two Issues ,
On Methods of Electing Representatives, Journal of the Statistical Society of London, vol.44, issue.2, pp.141-202, 1881. ,
DOI : 10.2307/2339223
Voting Procedures, 1984. ,
Properties of multiwinner voting rules, Social Choice and Welfare, vol.28, issue.4, pp.599-632, 2017. ,
DOI : 10.1137/0128067
Choosing collectively optimal sets of alternatives based on the Condorcet criterion, Proceedings IJCAI11ijcai.org/Proceedings, pp.186-191, 2011. ,
Condorcet winning sets, Social Choice and Welfare, vol.4, issue.3, pp.493-517, 2015. ,
DOI : 10.1007/BF00433944
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01509956
Convex -a Maple package for convex geometry, version 1.2 available at http://www-home.math.uwo.ca, 2016. ,
Multiwinner Rules on Paths From k-Borda to Chamberlin???Courant, Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp.192-198, 2017. ,
DOI : 10.24963/ijcai.2017/28
URL : https://www.ijcai.org/proceedings/2017/0028.pdf
An Analysis of Simple Voting Systems for Electing Committees, SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, vol.41, issue.3, pp.499-502, 1981. ,
DOI : 10.1137/0141041
The Condorcet criterion and committee selection, Mathematical Social Sciences, vol.10, issue.3, pp.199-209, 1985. ,
DOI : 10.1016/0165-4896(85)90043-5
The probability of the paradox of voting: A computable solution, Journal of Economic Theory, vol.13, issue.1, pp.14-25, 1976. ,
DOI : 10.1016/0022-0531(76)90063-6
Elections, Voting Rules and Paradoxical Outcomes, 2017. ,
DOI : 10.1007/978-3-319-64659-6
Voting paradoxes and group coherence, 2011. ,
DOI : 10.1007/978-3-642-03107-6
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01243452
An Evaluation of the Benet of Using Two-Stage Election Procedures, Homo Oeconomicus, forthcoming, 2017. ,
A note on Approval Voting and electing the Condorcet loser, Mathematical Social Sciences, vol.80, pp.115-122, 2016. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2016.02.009
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01452548
Voters??? preference diversity, concepts of agreement and Condorcet???s paradox, Quality & Quantity, vol.74, issue.6, pp.2345-2368, 2015. ,
DOI : 10.2307/1884349
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01452557
On stable rules for selecting committees, Journal of Mathematical Economics, vol.70, pp.36-44, 2017. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.jmateco.2017.01.008
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01631177
Some remarks on the Chamberlin-Count rule. Mimeo, 2014. ,
Scoring rules over subsets of alternatives: Consistency and paradoxes, Journal of Mathematical Economics, vol.61, pp.130-138, 2015. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.jmateco.2015.08.008
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01238563
Scoring rules and preference restrictions: The Strong Borda Paradox revisited. Revue d'Economie Politique, pp.375-395, 2017. ,
DOI : 10.3917/redp.273.0375
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01631180
Sets of alternatives as Condorcet winners, Social Choice and Welfare, vol.20, issue.3, pp.477-494, 2003. ,
DOI : 10.1007/s003550200194
Approval balloting for xed-size committees, Electoral Systems: Paradoxes, Assumptions, and Procedures, pp.305-326, 2012. ,
DOI : 10.1007/978-3-642-20441-8_12
How to Elect a Representative Committee Using Approval Balloting, Mathematics and Democracy: Recent Advances in Voting Systems and Collective Choice, 2006. ,
DOI : 10.1007/3-540-35605-3_6
Monotonicity paradoxes in three-candidate elections using scoring elimination rules, Social Choice and Welfare, vol.54, issue.6, pp.1-33, 2018. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2007.05.003
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01697627
On Ehrhart polynomials and probability calculations in voting theory, Social Choice and Welfare, vol.25, issue.6, pp.363-383, 2008. ,
DOI : 10.1007/s00355-007-0236-1
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01245310
Budgeted social choice: From consensus to personalized decision making, Proceedings of IJCAI-11, pp.280-286, 2011. ,
How hard is it to control an election by breaking ties?, Proc. of 21st ECAI, pp.1067-1068, 2014. ,
Asymptotic vulnerability of positional voting rules to coalitional manipulation, Mathematical Social Sciences, vol.89, pp.70-82, 2017. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2017.06.006
Ties matter: Complexity of voting manipulation revisited, Proc. of 10th AAMAS Conference, pp.71-78, 2011. ,
Proportional Representation, Journal of Theoretical Politics, vol.20, issue.5, pp.147-178, 1998. ,
DOI : 10.1016/0261-3794(93)90025-F
On the complexity of achieving proportional representation, Social Choice and Welfare, vol.28, issue.4, pp.353-362, 2008. ,
DOI : 10.1007/s00355-007-0235-2
Some startling inconsistencies when electing committees, Social Choice and Welfare, vol.21, issue.3, pp.433-454, 2003. ,
DOI : 10.1007/s00355-003-0209-y
Selecting Committees, Public Choice, vol.21, issue.3, pp.343-355, 2006. ,
DOI : 10.1017/CBO9780511606076
Axiomatic Characterization of Committee Scoring Rules, pp.1604-01529, 2016. ,
Achieving fully proportional representation: Approximability results, Artificial Intelligence, vol.222, pp.1312-4026, 2013. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.artint.2015.01.003
URL : http://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.4026
The complexity of fully proportional representation for single-crossing electorates, Theoretical Computer Science, vol.569, pp.43-57, 2015. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.tcs.2014.12.012
Borda elimination rule and monotonicity paradoxes in three-candidate elections, Economics Bulletin, vol.36, issue.3, pp.1722-1728, 2016. ,
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01452550
On representative government and personal representation, Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1871. ,
Computation and Manipulation of Enumerators of Integer Projections of Parametric Polytopes, 2005. ,
Probability calculations under the IAC hypothesis, Mathematical Social Sciences, vol.54, issue.3, pp.244-256, 2007. ,
DOI : 10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2007.05.003
URL : http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.3493
An axiomatization of Borda's rule, Journal of Economic Theory, vol.9, issue.1, pp.43-52, 1974. ,
DOI : 10.1016/0022-0531(74)90073-8