The Optimal Size of an Epistemic Congress

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2107.01042v1
• Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2021 12:51:11 GMT
• Title: The Optimal Size of an Epistemic Congress
• Authors: Manon Revel, Tao Lin, Daniel Halpern
• Abstract summary: We analyze the optimal size of a congress in a representative democracy. We find that the optimal congress size should be linear in the population size. We conclude by analyzing under what conditions congresses of sub-optimal sizes would still outperform direct democracy.
• Score: 11.984912130257795
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: We analyze the optimal size of a congress in a representative democracy. We take an epistemic view where voters decide on a binary issue with one ground truth outcome, and each voter votes correctly according to their competence levels in $[0, 1]$. Assuming that we can sample the best experts to form an epistemic congress, we find that the optimal congress size should be linear in the population size. This result is striking because it holds even when allowing the top representatives to be accurate with arbitrarily high probabilities. We then analyze real world data, finding that the actual sizes of congresses are much smaller than the optimal size our theoretical results suggest. We conclude by analyzing under what conditions congresses of sub-optimal sizes would still outperform direct democracy, in which all voters vote.

Related papers

• ElectionSim: Massive Population Election Simulation Powered by Large Language Model Driven Agents [70.17229548653852]
  We introduce ElectionSim, an innovative election simulation framework based on large language models. We present a million-level voter pool sampled from social media platforms to support accurate individual simulation. We also introduce PPE, a poll-based presidential election benchmark to assess the performance of our framework under the U.S. presidential election scenario.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-28T05:25:50Z)
• Improving the Computational Efficiency of Adaptive Audits of IRV Elections [54.427049258408424]
  AWAIRE can audit IRV contests with any number of candidates, but the original implementation incurred memory and computation costs that grew superexponentially with the number of candidates. This paper improves the algorithmic implementation of AWAIRE in three ways that make it practical to audit IRV contests with 55 candidates, compared to the previous 6 candidates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T13:28:00Z)
• Representation Bias in Political Sample Simulations with Large Language Models [54.48283690603358]
  This study seeks to identify and quantify biases in simulating political samples with Large Language Models. Using the GPT-3.5-Turbo model, we leverage data from the American National Election Studies, German Longitudinal Election Study, Zuobiao dataset, and China Family Panel Studies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T05:52:26Z)
• Efficient Weighting Schemes for Auditing Instant-Runoff Voting Elections [57.67176250198289]
  AWAIRE involves adaptively weighted averages of test statistics, essentially "learning" an effective set of hypotheses to test. We explore schemes and settings more extensively, to identify and recommend efficient choices for practice. A limitation of the current AWAIRE implementation is its restriction to a small number of candidates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T10:13:01Z)
• Proportional Aggregation of Preferences for Sequential Decision Making [20.374669324368625]
  We study the problem of fair sequential decision making given voter preferences. In each round, a decision rule must choose a decision from a set of alternatives where each voter reports which of these alternatives they approve. We formalize this aim using axioms based on Proportional Justified Representation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-26T17:10:10Z)
• Design and analysis of tweet-based election models for the 2021 Mexican legislative election [55.41644538483948]
  We use a dataset of 15 million election-related tweets in the six months preceding election day. We find that models using data with geographical attributes determine the results of the election with better precision and accuracy than conventional polling methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-02T12:40:05Z)
• Election of government ministers [0.0]
  We propose a scenario where government members are directly elected by the people. In this article, we will present the implementation of the algorithm (GreedyPAV) proposed by Rutvik Page, Ehud Shapiro, and Nimrod Talmon.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-13T07:26:38Z)
• The Price of Majority Support [25.71206255965502]
  We quantify the loss in representativeness that results from requiring the outcome to have majority support. Our results can also be seen as quantifying Anscombes paradox which states that topic-wise majority outcome may not be supported by a majority.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-28T18:09:16Z)
• Bribery as a Measure of Candidate Success: Complexity Results for Approval-Based Multiwinner Rules [58.8640284079665]
  We study the problem of bribery in multiwinner elections, for the case where the voters cast approval ballots (i.e., sets of candidates they approve) We consider a number of approval-based multiwinner rules (AV, SAV, GAV, RAV, approval-based Chamberlin--Courant, and PAV) In general, our problems tend to be easier when we limit out bribery actions on increasing the number of approvals of the candidate that we want to be in a winning committee.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-19T08:26:40Z)
• Modeling Voters in Multi-Winner Approval Voting [24.002910959494923]
  We study voting behavior in single-winner and multi-winner approval voting scenarios with varying degrees of uncertainty. We find that people generally manipulate their vote to obtain a better outcome, but often do not identify the optimal manipulation. We propose a novel model that takes into account the size of the winning set and human cognitive constraints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-04T19:24:28Z)
• Representative Committees of Peers [21.26271260313741]
  We show that a k-sortition leads to an outcome within the factor 1+O (1/k) of the optimal social cost for any number of voters. For large issues, we demonstrate that the k-sortition is the worst-case optimal rule within a broad family of committee-based rules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-14T08:20:47Z)

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.