Related papers: Responsibility Gap in Collective Decision Making

Related papers

Is Decentralized AI Governable? From Regulative Policy to Constitutive Protocol [1.5755923640031846]
We analyze DeAI as a six-layer decentralizing stack.<n>We argue for a shift in the locus of governance from policy to protocol.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-23T12:09:56Z)
When Agents Evolve, Institutions Follow [52.359340707289114]
We argue that multi-agent systems built on large language models face the same challenge.<n>Their central problem is not only individual intelligence, but collective organization.<n>We translate seven historical political institutions, spanning four canonical governance patterns, into executable multi-agent architectures.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-30T10:30:58Z)
Votiverse: A Configurable Governance Platform for Democratic Decision-Making [0.0]
Votiverse is a platform for exploring the rest of democracy's possible configurations.<n>It provides organizations, communities, and institutions of any size with a governance engine.<n>This paper formalizes the governance model, situates it within existing work on liquid democracy and participatory decision-making, addresses known failure modes, and describes the architecture of the platform.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-24T21:38:08Z)
Towards Selection as Power: Bounding Decision Authority in Autonomous Agents [0.0]
We propose a governance architecture that separates cognition, selection, and action into distinct domains and models autonomy as a vector of sovereignty.<n>We evaluate the system across multiple regulated financial scenarios under adversarial stress targeting variance manipulation, threshold gaming, framing skew, ordering effects, and entropy probing.<n>Results show that mechanical selection governance is implementable, auditable, and prevents deterministic outcome capture while preserving reasoning capacity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-16T10:10:47Z)
Methods and Open Problems in Differentiable Social Choice: Learning Mechanisms, Decisions, and Alignment [7.764532811300023]
Social choice is no longer a peripheral concern of political theory or economics.<n>This Review surveys differentiable social choice: an emerging paradigm that formulates voting rules, mechanisms, and aggregation procedures as learnable, differentiable models optimized from data.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-03T02:17:16Z)
Diffusion of Responsibility in Collective Decision Making [26.831475621780577]
"Diffusion of responsibility" refers to situations in which multiple agents share responsibility for an outcome, obscuring individual accountability.<n>This paper examines this frequently undesirable phenomenon in the context of collective decision-making mechanisms.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-09T16:54:56Z)
Agency Is Frame-Dependent [94.91580596320331]
Agency is a system's capacity to steer outcomes toward a goal.<n>We argue that agency is fundamentally frame-dependent.<n>We conclude that any basic science of agency requires frame-dependence.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-06T08:34:57Z)
Harm Ratio: A Novel and Versatile Fairness Criterion [27.18270261374462]
Envy-freeness has become the cornerstone of fair division research. We propose a novel fairness criterion, individual harm ratio, inspired by envy-freeness. Our criterion is powerful enough to differentiate between prominent decision-making algorithms.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-03T20:36:05Z)
Aligning AI with Public Values: Deliberation and Decision-Making for Governing Multimodal LLMs in Political Video Analysis [48.14390493099495]
How AI models should deal with political topics has been discussed, but it remains challenging and requires better governance.<n>This paper examines the governance of large language models through individual and collective deliberation, focusing on politically sensitive videos.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-15T03:17:38Z)
Causal Fair Machine Learning via Rank-Preserving Interventional Distributions [0.5062312533373299]
We define individuals as being normatively equal if they are equal in a fictitious, normatively desired (FiND) world. We propose rank-preserving interventional distributions to define a specific FiND world in which this holds. We show that our warping approach effectively identifies the most discriminated individuals and mitigates unfairness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-24T13:46:50Z)
Causal Fairness for Outcome Control [68.12191782657437]
We study a specific decision-making task called outcome control in which an automated system aims to optimize an outcome variable $Y$ while being fair and equitable. In this paper, we first analyze through causal lenses the notion of benefit, which captures how much a specific individual would benefit from a positive decision. We then note that the benefit itself may be influenced by the protected attribute, and propose causal tools which can be used to analyze this.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-08T09:31:18Z)
Moral Machine or Tyranny of the Majority? [25.342029326793917]
In Moral Machine project, researchers crowdsourced answers to "Trolley Problems" concerning autonomous vehicles. Noothigattu et al. proposed inferring linear functions that approximate each individual's preferences and aggregating these linear models by averaging parameters across the population. In this paper, we examine this averaging mechanism, focusing on fairness concerns in the presence of strategic effects.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-27T00:49:11Z)
Causal Fairness Analysis [68.12191782657437]
We introduce a framework for understanding, modeling, and possibly solving issues of fairness in decision-making settings. The main insight of our approach will be to link the quantification of the disparities present on the observed data with the underlying, and often unobserved, collection of causal mechanisms. Our effort culminates in the Fairness Map, which is the first systematic attempt to organize and explain the relationship between different criteria found in the literature.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-07-23T01:06:34Z)
Differential Parity: Relative Fairness Between Two Sets of Decisions [4.106941784309168]
We propose to test the relative fairness of one decision set against another with differential parity.<n>It avoids the ambiguous and contradictory definition of absolutely'' fair decisions.<n>It reveals the relative preference and bias between two decision sets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-12-21T15:05:42Z)
Automated Mechanism Design for Classification with Partial Verification [64.69418921224529]
We study the problem of automated mechanism design with partial verification. We focus on truthful mechanisms in the setting where all types share the same preference over outcomes.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-04-12T03:29:31Z)
A Formal Model for Adaptive Free Choice in Complex Systems [0.0]
I develop a formal model of free will for complex systems based on emergent properties and adaptive selection. The focus in this model is on the actual choices themselves viewed in the context of processes.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-11-12T22:05:33Z)
Decentralized Reinforcement Learning: Global Decision-Making via Local Economic Transactions [80.49176924360499]
We establish a framework for directing a society of simple, specialized, self-interested agents to solve sequential decision problems. We derive a class of decentralized reinforcement learning algorithms. We demonstrate the potential advantages of a society's inherent modular structure for more efficient transfer learning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-07-05T16:41:09Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.