Indivisible Participatory Budgeting under Weak Rankings

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2207.07981v1
• Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 16:46:12 GMT
• Title: Indivisible Participatory Budgeting under Weak Rankings
• Authors: Gogulapati Sreedurga and Yadati Narahari
• Abstract summary: Participatory budgeting (PB) has attracted much attention in recent times due to its wide applicability in social choice settings. We propose classes of rules for indivisible PB with weak rankings (i.e., weak ordinal preferences) and investigate their key algorithmic and axiomatic issues. The paper helps to highlight the trade-offs among practical appeal, computational complexity, and axiomatic compliance of these rules.
• Score: 0.6853165736531939
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Participatory budgeting (PB) has attracted much attention in recent times due to its wide applicability in social choice settings. In this paper, we consider indivisible PB which involves allocating an available, limited budget to a set of indivisible projects, each having a certain cost, based on the preferences of agents over projects. The specific, important, research gap that we address in this paper is to propose classes of rules for indivisible PB with weak rankings (i.e., weak ordinal preferences) and investigate their key algorithmic and axiomatic issues. We propose two classes of rules having distinct significance and motivation. The first is layered approval rules which enable weak rankings to be studied by carefully translating them into approval votes. The second is need-based rules which enable to capture fairness issues. Under layered approval rules, we study two natural families of rules: greedy-truncation rules and cost-worthy rules. The paper has two parts. In the first part, we investigate algorithmic and complexity related issues for the proposed rules. In the second part, we present a detailed axiomatic analysis of these rules, for which, we examine and generalize axioms in the literature and also introduce a new axiom, pro-affordability. The paper helps to highlight the trade-offs among practical appeal, computational complexity, and axiomatic compliance of these rules.

Related papers

• Can LLMs Reason with Rules? Logic Scaffolding for Stress-Testing and Improving LLMs [87.34281749422756]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive human-like performance across various reasoning tasks. However, their mastery of underlying inferential rules still falls short of human capabilities. We propose a logic scaffolding inferential rule generation framework, to construct an inferential rule base, ULogic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T03:38:51Z)
• RankCSE: Unsupervised Sentence Representations Learning via Learning to Rank [54.854714257687334]
  We propose a novel approach, RankCSE, for unsupervised sentence representation learning. It incorporates ranking consistency and ranking distillation with contrastive learning into a unified framework. An extensive set of experiments are conducted on both semantic textual similarity (STS) and transfer (TR) tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T08:27:07Z)
• Machine Learning with Probabilistic Law Discovery: A Concise Introduction [77.34726150561087]
  Probabilistic Law Discovery (PLD) is a logic based Machine Learning method, which implements a variant of probabilistic rule learning. PLD is close to Decision Tree/Random Forest methods, but it differs significantly in how relevant rules are defined. This paper outlines the main principles of PLD, highlight its benefits and limitations and provide some application guidelines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-22T17:40:13Z)
• Social Mechanism Design: A Low-Level Introduction [31.564788318133264]
  We show that agents have preferences over both decision outcomes and the rules or procedures used to make decisions. We identify simple, intuitive preference structures at low levels that can be generalized to form the building blocks of preferences at higher levels. We analyze algorithms for acceptance in two different domains: asymmetric dichotomous choice and constitutional amendment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-15T20:59:34Z)
• Exploiting Contrastive Learning and Numerical Evidence for Confusing Legal Judgment Prediction [46.71918729837462]
  Given the fact description text of a legal case, legal judgment prediction aims to predict the case's charge, law article and penalty term. Previous studies fail to distinguish different classification errors with a standard cross-entropy classification loss. We propose a moco-based supervised contrastive learning to learn distinguishable representations. We further enhance the representation of the fact description with extracted crime amounts which are encoded by a pre-trained numeracy model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-15T15:53:56Z)
• Most Equitable Voting Rules [30.930621357547487]
  ANR impossibility -- there is no voting rule that satisfies anonymity, neutrality, and resolvability -- holds even in the simple setting of two alternatives and two agents. We propose a novel and strong notion of most equitable refinements that optimally preserves anonymity and neutrality for any irresolute rule that satisfies the two axioms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-30T03:56:54Z)
• Towards a multi-stakeholder value-based assessment framework for algorithmic systems [76.79703106646967]
  We develop a value-based assessment framework that visualizes closeness and tensions between values. We give guidelines on how to operationalize them, while opening up the evaluation and deliberation process to a wide range of stakeholders.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-09T19:28:32Z)
• 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)
• Fair Decision Rules for Binary Classification [0.0]
  We consider the problem of building Boolean rule sets in disjunctive normal form (DNF) We formulate the problem as an integer program that maximizes classification accuracy with explicit constraints on two different measures of classification parity. Compared to other fair and interpretable classifiers, our method is able to find rule sets that meet stricter notions of fairness with a modest trade-off in accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-03T02:32:17Z)
• Building Rule Hierarchies for Efficient Logical Rule Learning from Knowledge Graphs [20.251630903853016]
  We propose new methods for pruning unpromising rules using rule hierarchies. We show that the application of HPMs is effective in removing unpromising rules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-29T16:33:30Z)
• 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.