  We study sincere-strategy preference-based approval voting (SP-AV), a system
proposed by Brams and Sanver [Electoral Studies, 25(2):287-305, 2006], and here
adjusted so as to coerce admissibility of the votes (rather than excluding
inadmissible votes a priori), with respect to procedural control. In such
control scenarios, an external agent seeks to change the outcome of an election
via actions such as adding/deleting/partitioning either candidates or voters.
SP-AV combines the voters' preference rankings with their approvals of
candidates, where in elections with at least two candidates the voters'
approval strategies are adjusted--if needed--to approve of their most-preferred
candidate and to disapprove of their least-preferred candidate. This rule
coerces admissibility of the votes even in the presence of control actions, and
hybridizes, in effect, approval with pluralitiy voting.
  We prove that this system is computationally resistant (i.e., the
corresponding control problems are NP-hard) to 19 out of 22 types of
constructive and destructive control. Thus, SP-AV has more resistances to
control than is currently known for any other natural voting system with a
polynomial-time winner problem. In particular, SP-AV is (after Copeland voting,
see Faliszewski et al. [AAIM-2008, Springer LNCS 5034, pp. 165-176, 2008]) the
second natural voting system with an easy winner-determination procedure that
is known to have full resistance to constructive control, and unlike Copeland
voting it in addition displays broad resistance to destructive control.
