Resilient Liquid Democracy: Mitigating Voting Power Imbalances via Secure Delegation Networks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01730v1
• Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2026 05:38:46 GMT
• Title: Resilient Liquid Democracy: Mitigating Voting Power Imbalances via Secure Delegation Networks
• Abstract summary: Liquid democracy promises to improve collective decision-making by allowing voters to vote directly, delegate their voting power to trusted participants, or combine both approaches through fallback mechanisms.<n>Existing deployments typically rely on transparent delegation, which exposes voters to popularity-driven herding, makes coercion verifiable, and introduces systemic fragility when highly-backed delegates abstain.<n>We propose a secure liquid democracy mechanism that resolves the tension between informed expertise routing and systemic fragility.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Liquid democracy promises to improve collective decision-making by allowing voters to vote directly, delegate their voting power to trusted participants, or combine both approaches through fallback mechanisms. However, existing deployments typically rely on transparent delegation, which exposes voters to popularity-driven herding, makes coercion verifiable, and introduces systemic fragility when highly-backed delegates abstain. In this paper, we propose a secure liquid democracy mechanism that resolves the tension between informed expertise routing and systemic robustness. We introduce a sealed delegation regime using decentralized timed-release encryption, which cryptographically hides delegation choices during the formation phase to prevent herding and coercion, while restoring full public auditability for the final tally. To address delegate failures, we extend the protocol with ranked multi-delegation and personal fallback ballots. We formally prove pre-reveal secrecy and resubmission receipt-freeness for our protocol. Finally, we evaluate the mechanism on four real datasets, a municipal participatory-budgeting election with a calibration survey, twenty further participatory-budgeting elections, and 60,000 US voters with an objective competence measure. They show that whether delegation improves representational accuracy follows a recoverable-gap law; it helps only when abstention is large and systematically unrepresentative, and is otherwise neutral or harmful, with representative-style delegation safer than delegating to a competence elite. The benefit of sealed formation is primarily structural, sharply reducing power concentration rather than directly improving accuracy; and ranked multi-delegation with personal fallback ballots sharply reduces vote loss under realistic and targeted delegate failures, a result that replicates across all twenty elections.

Related papers

• GoodDiffusion: Proactive Copyright Protection for Diffusion Bridge Models via Learnable Sample-specific Signatures [88.63093209858387]
  We propose GoodDiffusion, inspired by backdoor mechanisms, to enforce model-level use-time control.<n>GoodDiffusion preserves high-quality generation for authorized queries carrying valid signatures, yet refuses to generate for unauthorized inputs.<n>To strengthen security, we introduce a Learnable Signature Network (LSN) that assigns sample-specific signatures conditioned on each input.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-29T04:07:09Z)
• Sublinear Risk-Limiting Audits from Direct Ballot Selection and Statistical Ballot Manifests [47.94589114324381]
  Risk-limiting audits (RLAs) are post-election auditing procedures that rigorously guarantee a specified maximum probability that an incorrect electoral outcome will not be detected.<n>While typical electoral procedures automatically provide rough estimates for batch sizes, even slight inaccuracies invalidate conventional RLAs.<n>We propose two new risk-limiting techniques: A statistical mechanism for ensuring that the batch sizes reported by an untrusted tabulation are, in fact, an accurate manifest and a new class of RLAs called direct ballot selection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T17:12:11Z)
• Votiverse: A Configurable Governance Platform for Democratic Decision-Making [0.0]
  Votiverse is a platform for exploring the rest of democracy's possible configurations.<n>It provides organizations, communities, and institutions of any size with a governance engine.<n>This paper formalizes the governance model, situates it within existing work on liquid democracy and participatory decision-making, addresses known failure modes, and describes the architecture of the platform.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-24T21:38:08Z)
• Preventing the Collapse of Peer Review Requires Verification-First AI [49.995126139461085]
  We propose truth-coupling, i.e. how tightly venue scores track latent scientific truth.<n>We formalize two forces that drive a phase transition toward proxy-sovereign evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-23T17:17:32Z)
• Are Voters Willing to Collectively Secure Elections? Unraveling a Practical Blockchain Voting System [0.0]
  This paper proposes the concept of collectively secure voting, in which voters themselves can opt in as secret holders to protect ballot secrecy.<n>A practical blockchain-based collectively secure voting system is designed and implemented.<n>Results show a high willingness to act as secret holders, reliable participation in share release, and high security confidence in the proposed system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-09T18:02:40Z)
• Artificial Delegates Resolve Fairness Issues in Perpetual Voting with Partial Turnout [4.734824660843963]
  We study the integration of Artificial Delegates, preference-learning agents trained to represent absent voters, into perpetual voting systems.<n>Our findings indicate that while absenteeism significantly affects fairness, Artificial Delegates reliably mitigate these effects and enhance robustness across diverse scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-26T12:44:50Z)
• Delegations as Adaptive Representation Patterns: Rethinking Influence in Liquid Democracy [5.801044612920816]
  Liquid democracy is a mechanism for the division of labor in decision-making through the delegation of influence.<n>Transitivity has been identified as a concern as it would be conducive to unrestrained accumulation of power.<n>By introducing a novel model of delegations in liquid democracy, we show how transitivity may in fact contribute to an effective regulation of deliberation influence and decision-making power.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-11T14:34:05Z)
• Deceptive Sequential Decision-Making via Regularized Policy Optimization [54.38738815697299]
  We model autonomous systems as Markov decision processes, with adversaries using inverse reinforcement learning to recover reward functions.<n>We show three regularization strategies for policy synthesis problems that actively deceive an adversary about a system's reward.<n>We show that diversionary, targeted, and equivocal deception all steer the adversary to false beliefs while still attaining a total accumulated reward that is at least 97% of its optimal, non-deceptive value.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-30T23:41:40Z)
• Generative AI Voting: Fair Collective Choice is Resilient to LLM Biases and Inconsistencies [21.444936180683147]
  We show that complex preferential ballot formats exhibit significant inconsistencies compared to simpler majoritarian elections.<n>Strikingly though, by demonstrating for the first time in real-world a proportional representation of voters in direct democracy, we are also able to show that fair ballot aggregation methods, such as equal shares, prove to be a win-win.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-31T01:41:48Z)
• The Decisive Power of Indecision: Low-Variance Risk-Limiting Audits and Election Contestation via Marginal Mark Recording [51.82772358241505]
  Risk-limiting audits (RLAs) are techniques for verifying the outcomes of large elections. We define new families of audits that improve efficiency and offer advances in statistical power. New audits are enabled by revisiting the standard notion of a cast-vote record so that it can declare multiple possible mark interpretations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-09T16:23:54Z)
• Adaptively Weighted Audits of Instant-Runoff Voting Elections: AWAIRE [61.872917066847855]
  Methods for auditing instant-runoff voting (IRV) elections are either not risk-limiting or require cast vote records (CVRs), the voting system's electronic record of the votes on each ballot. We develop an RLA method that uses adaptively weighted averages of test supermartingales to efficiently audit IRV elections when CVRs are not available.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T15:55:34Z)
• OpenVoting: Recoverability from Failures in Dual Voting [0.3903025330856987]
  We consider the setting of emphdual voting protocols, where the cryptographic guarantees of end-to-end verifiable voting are combined with the simplicity of audit using voter-verified paper records (VVPR) We first consider the design requirements of such a system and then suggest a protocol called emphOpenVoting, which identifies a verifiable subset of error-free votes consistent with the VVPRs, and the polling booths corresponding to the votes that fail to verify with possible reasons for the failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2019-08-26T09:32:54Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.