Consensus-based Participatory Budgeting for Legitimacy: Decision Support via Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.12915v1
• Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:16:23 GMT
• Title: Consensus-based Participatory Budgeting for Legitimacy: Decision Support via Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning
• Authors: Srijoni Majumdar and Evangelos Pournaras
• Abstract summary: Participatory budgeting is a process where voting outcomes may not always be fair or inclusive. This paper introduces a novel and legitimate consensus-based participatory budgeting process. Voters are assisted to interact with each other to make viable compromises.
• Score: 3.3504365823045044
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The legitimacy of bottom-up democratic processes for the distribution of public funds by policy-makers is challenging and complex. Participatory budgeting is such a process, where voting outcomes may not always be fair or inclusive. Deliberation for which project ideas to put for voting and choose for implementation lack systematization and do not scale. This paper addresses these grand challenges by introducing a novel and legitimate iterative consensus-based participatory budgeting process. Consensus is designed to be a result of decision support via an innovative multi-agent reinforcement learning approach. Voters are assisted to interact with each other to make viable compromises. Extensive experimental evaluation with real-world participatory budgeting data from Poland reveal striking findings: Consensus is reachable, efficient and robust. Compromise is required, which is though comparable to the one of existing voting aggregation methods that promote fairness and inclusion without though attaining consensus.

Related papers

• From Experts to the Public: Governing Multimodal Language Models in Politically Sensitive Video Analysis [48.14390493099495]
  This paper examines the governance of large language models (MM-LLMs) through individual and collective deliberation. We conducted a two-step study: first, interviews with 10 journalists established a baseline understanding of expert video interpretation; second, 114 individuals from the general public engaged in deliberation using Inclusive.AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-15T03:17:38Z)
• 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)
• Optimising Human-AI Collaboration by Learning Convincing Explanations [62.81395661556852]
  We propose a method for a collaborative system that remains safe by having a human making decisions. Ardent enables efficient and effective decision-making by adapting to individual preferences for explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-13T16:00:16Z)
• Designing Digital Voting Systems for Citizens: Achieving Fairness and Legitimacy in Participatory Budgeting [10.977733942901535]
  Participatory Budgeting (PB) has evolved into a key democratic instrument for resource allocation in cities. This work presents the results of behavioural experiments where participants were asked to vote in a fictional PB setting. We identify approaches to designing PB voting that minimise cognitive load and enhance the perceived fairness and legitimacy of the digital process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-05T12:25:48Z)
• Fair and Inclusive Participatory Budgeting: Voter Experience with Cumulative and Quadratic Voting Interfaces [1.4730691320093603]
  Cumulative and quadratic voting are expressive, promoting fairness and inclusion. Despite these benefits, graphical voter interfaces for cumulative and quadratic voting are complex to implement and use effectively. This paper introduces an implementation and evaluation of cumulative and quadratic voting within a state-of-the-art voting platform: Stanford Participatory Budgeting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-08T15:45:55Z)
• VoteLab: A Modular and Adaptive Experimentation Platform for Online Collective Decision Making [0.9503786527351696]
  This paper introduces VoteLab, an open-source platform for modular and adaptive design of voting experiments. It supports to visually and interactively build reusable campaigns with a choice of different voting methods. Voters can easily respond to subscribed voting questions on a smartphone.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T14:26:21Z)
• Social Diversity Reduces the Complexity and Cost of Fostering Fairness [63.70639083665108]
  We investigate the effects of interference mechanisms which assume incomplete information and flexible standards of fairness. We quantify the role of diversity and show how it reduces the need for information gathering. Our results indicate that diversity changes and opens up novel mechanisms available to institutions wishing to promote fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-18T21:58:35Z)
• 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)
• Citizen Participation and Machine Learning for a Better Democracy [22.682698778214434]
  We report on the progress of a project that aims to address barriers to citizen participation in democratic decision-making processes. The main objectives are to explore if the application of Natural Language Processing (NLP) and machine learning can improve citizens' experience of digital citizen participation platforms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-28T13:30:07Z)
• Multi-Stage Decentralized Matching Markets: Uncertain Preferences and Strategic Behaviors [91.3755431537592]
  This article develops a framework for learning optimal strategies in real-world matching markets. We show that there exists a welfare-versus-fairness trade-off that is characterized by the uncertainty level of acceptance. We prove that participants can be better off with multi-stage matching compared to single-stage matching.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-13T19:25:52Z)
• Contestable Black Boxes [10.552465253379134]
  This paper investigates the type of assurances that are needed in the contesting process when algorithmic black-boxes are involved. We argue that specialised complementary methodologies to evaluate automated decision-making in the case of a particular decision being contested need to be developed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-09T09:09:00Z)

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.