What Should We Optimize in Participatory Budgeting? An Experimental Study

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2111.07308v1
• Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2021 10:46:03 GMT
• Title: What Should We Optimize in Participatory Budgeting? An Experimental Study
• Authors: Ariel Rosenfeld, Nimrod Talmon
• Abstract summary: Participatory Budgeting (PB) is a process in which voters decide how to allocate a common budget. We show that some modern PB aggregation techniques greatly differ from users' expectations. We identify a few possible discrepancies between what non-experts consider saydesirable and how they perceive the notion of "fairness" in the PB context.
• Score: 28.76045220764571
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Participatory Budgeting (PB) is a process in which voters decide how to allocate a common budget; most commonly it is done by ordinary people -- in particular, residents of some municipality -- to decide on a fraction of the municipal budget. From a social choice perspective, existing research on PB focuses almost exclusively on designing computationally-efficient aggregation methods that satisfy certain axiomatic properties deemed "desirable" by the research community. Our work complements this line of research through a user study (N = 215) involving several experiments aimed at identifying what potential voters (i.e., non-experts) deem fair or desirable in simple PB settings. Our results show that some modern PB aggregation techniques greatly differ from users' expectations, while other, more standard approaches, provide more aligned results. We also identify a few possible discrepancies between what non-experts consider \say{desirable} and how they perceive the notion of "fairness" in the PB context. Taken jointly, our results can be used to help the research community identify appropriate PB aggregation methods to use in practice.

Related papers

• Exploring Welfare Maximization and Fairness in Participatory Budgeting [1.6317061277457001]
  Participatory budgeting (PB) is a voting paradigm for distributing a divisible resource, usually called a budget, among a set of projects by aggregating the preferences of individuals over these projects. This PhD dissertation studies the welfare-related and fairness-related objectives for different PB models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-26T10:51:22Z)
• Reduced-Rank Multi-objective Policy Learning and Optimization [57.978477569678844]
  In practice, causal researchers do not have a single outcome in mind a priori. In government-assisted social benefit programs, policymakers collect many outcomes to understand the multidimensional nature of poverty. We present a data-driven dimensionality-reduction methodology for multiple outcomes in the context of optimal policy learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-29T08:16:30Z)
• Probe: Learning Users' Personalized Projection Bias in Intertemporal Choices [5.874142059884521]
  In this work, we focus on two commonly observed biases: projection bias and the reference-point effect. To address these biases, we propose a novel bias-embedded preference model called Probe. The Probe incorporates a weight function to capture users' projection bias and a value function to account for the reference-point effect.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-09T12:13:46Z)
• Near-Optimal Experimental Design Under the Budget Constraint in Online Platforms [13.203565751596221]
  A/B testing, or controlled experiments, is the gold standard approach to causally compare the performance of algorithms on online platforms. We develop a model to describe two-sided platforms where buyers have limited budgets. We provide an optimal experimental design that guarantees small bias and minimum variance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-10T01:24:52Z)
• In Search of Insights, Not Magic Bullets: Towards Demystification of the Model Selection Dilemma in Heterogeneous Treatment Effect Estimation [92.51773744318119]
  This paper empirically investigates the strengths and weaknesses of different model selection criteria. We highlight that there is a complex interplay between selection strategies, candidate estimators and the data used for comparing them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-06T16:55:37Z)
• Improved Policy Evaluation for Randomized Trials of Algorithmic Resource Allocation [54.72195809248172]
  We present a new estimator leveraging our proposed novel concept, that involves retrospective reshuffling of participants across experimental arms at the end of an RCT. We prove theoretically that such an estimator is more accurate than common estimators based on sample means.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-06T05:17:22Z)
• Square One Bias in NLP: Towards a Multi-Dimensional Exploration of the Research Manifold [88.83876819883653]
  We show through a manual classification of recent NLP research papers that this is indeed the case. We observe that NLP research often goes beyond the square one setup, focusing not only on accuracy, but also on fairness or interpretability, but typically only along a single dimension.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-20T13:04:23Z)
• Maxmin Participatory Budgeting [1.1602089225841632]
  Participatory Budgeting (PB) is a popular voting method by which a limited budget is divided among a set of projects, based on the preferences of voters over the projects. Egalitarianism, an important objective in PB, has not received much attention in the context of indivisible PB. This paper addresses this gap through a detailed study of a natural egalitarian rule, Maxmin Participatory Budgeting (MPB)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-29T07:45:44Z)
• Fairness Preferences, Actual and Hypothetical: A Study of Crowdworker Incentives [1.854931308524932]
  This paper outlines a research program and experimental designs for investigating these questions. The voting is hypothetical (not tied to an outcome) for half the group and actual (tied to the actual payment outcome) for the other half, so that we can understand the relation between a group's actual preferences and hypothetical (stated) preferences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-08T05:00:57Z)
• Preference-based Reinforcement Learning with Finite-Time Guarantees [76.88632321436472]
  Preference-based Reinforcement Learning (PbRL) replaces reward values in traditional reinforcement learning to better elicit human opinion on the target objective. Despite promising results in applications, the theoretical understanding of PbRL is still in its infancy. We present the first finite-time analysis for general PbRL problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-16T03:52:41Z)
• Public Bayesian Persuasion: Being Almost Optimal and Almost Persuasive [57.47546090379434]
  We study the public persuasion problem in the general setting with: (i) arbitrary state spaces; (ii) arbitrary action spaces; (iii) arbitrary sender's utility functions. We provide a quasi-polynomial time bi-criteria approximation algorithm for arbitrary public persuasion problems that, in specific settings, yields a QPTAS.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-12T18:59:18Z)

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.