Alternates, Assemble! Selecting Optimal Alternates for Citizens' Assemblies

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.15716v1
• Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2025 17:48:33 GMT
• Title: Alternates, Assemble! Selecting Optimal Alternates for Citizens' Assemblies
• Authors: Angelos Assos, Carmel Baharav, Bailey Flanigan, Ariel Procaccia,
• Abstract summary: deliberative democracy centers on citizens' assemblies, where randomly selected people discuss policy questions.<n>We introduce an optimization framework for alternate selection.<n>Our approach estimates dropout probabilities using historical data and selects alternates to minimize expected misrepresentation.<n> Empirical evaluation using real-world data demonstrates that, compared to the status quo, our method significantly improves representation while requiring fewer alternates.
• Score: 1.5624421399300306
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: An increasingly influential form of deliberative democracy centers on citizens' assemblies, where randomly selected people discuss policy questions. The legitimacy of these panels hinges on their representation of the broader population, but panelists often drop out, leading to an unbalanced composition. Although participant attrition is mitigated in practice by alternates, their selection is not taken into account by existing methods. To address this gap, we introduce an optimization framework for alternate selection. Our algorithmic approach, which leverages learning-theoretic machinery, estimates dropout probabilities using historical data and selects alternates to minimize expected misrepresentation. We establish theoretical guarantees for our approach, including worst-case bounds on sample complexity (with implications for computational efficiency) and on loss when panelists' probabilities of dropping out are mis-estimated. Empirical evaluation using real-world data demonstrates that, compared to the status quo, our method significantly improves representation while requiring fewer alternates.

Related papers

• A Principled Approach to Randomized Selection under Uncertainty [68.43987626137512]
  We propose a principled framework for randomized decision-making based on interval estimates of the quality of each item.<n>We introduce MERIT, an optimization-based method that maximizes the worst-case expected number of top candidates selected.<n>We prove that MERIT satisfies desirable axiomatic properties not guaranteed by existing approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-23T19:59:30Z)
• Population-Proportional Preference Learning from Human Feedback: An Axiomatic Approach [6.578074497549894]
  We develop a novel preference learning framework capable of aligning aggregate opinions and policies proportionally with the true population distribution of evaluator preferences.<n>Our approach infers the feasible set of evaluator population distributions directly from pairwise comparison data.<n>We propose a soft-max relaxation method that smoothly trade-offs population-proportional representation with the selection of the Condorcet winner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T22:15:07Z)
• Sequential Manipulation Against Rank Aggregation: Theory and Algorithm [119.57122943187086]
  We leverage an online attack on the vulnerable data collection process. From the game-theoretic perspective, the confrontation scenario is formulated as a distributionally robust game. The proposed method manipulates the results of rank aggregation methods in a sequential manner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T03:31:21Z)
• Optimal Baseline Corrections for Off-Policy Contextual Bandits [61.740094604552475]
  We aim to learn decision policies that optimize an unbiased offline estimate of an online reward metric. We propose a single framework built on their equivalence in learning scenarios. Our framework enables us to characterize the variance-optimal unbiased estimator and provide a closed-form solution for it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-09T12:52:22Z)
• 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)
• Partial-Label Learning with a Reject Option [3.1201323892302444]
  We propose a risk-consistent nearest-neighbor-based partial-label learning algorithm with a reject option.<n>Our method provides the best trade-off between the number and accuracy of non-rejected predictions.<n>When evaluated without the reject option, our nearest-neighbor-based approach also achieves competitive prediction performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-01T13:41:44Z)
• Adversarial Reweighting Guided by Wasserstein Distance for Bias Mitigation [24.160692009892088]
  Under-representation of minorities in the data makes the disparate treatment of subpopulations difficult to deal with during learning. We propose a novel adversarial reweighting method to address such emphrepresentation bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-21T15:46:11Z)
• Tackling Diverse Minorities in Imbalanced Classification [80.78227787608714]
  Imbalanced datasets are commonly observed in various real-world applications, presenting significant challenges in training classifiers. We propose generating synthetic samples iteratively by mixing data samples from both minority and majority classes. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed framework through extensive experiments conducted on seven publicly available benchmark datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-28T18:48:34Z)
• Correcting Underrepresentation and Intersectional Bias for Classification [49.1574468325115]
  We consider the problem of learning from data corrupted by underrepresentation bias. We show that with a small amount of unbiased data, we can efficiently estimate the group-wise drop-out rates. We show that our algorithm permits efficient learning for model classes of finite VC dimension.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-19T18:25:44Z)
• Bi-objective Ranking and Selection Using Stochastic Kriging [0.0]
  We consider bi-objective ranking and selection problems in which the two objective outcomes have been observed with uncertainty. We propose a novel Bayesian bi-objective ranking and selection method that sequentially allocates extra samples to competitive solutions. Experimental results show that the proposed method outperforms the standard allocation method, as well as a well-known state-of-the-art algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-05T23:51:07Z)
• Local policy search with Bayesian optimization [73.0364959221845]
  Reinforcement learning aims to find an optimal policy by interaction with an environment. Policy gradients for local search are often obtained from random perturbations. We develop an algorithm utilizing a probabilistic model of the objective function and its gradient.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-22T16:07:02Z)

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.