AGORA: Can Deliberation and Governance Gates Absorb Participation Bias in Transit Planning?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.13696v1
• Date: Sun, 31 May 2026 08:00:37 GMT
• Title: AGORA: Can Deliberation and Governance Gates Absorb Participation Bias in Transit Planning?
• Abstract summary: Current practice collects one-directional comments from self-selected attendees, leaving participant mix as an uncontrolled source of outcome variation.<n>We present AGORA, a framework that holds the network, demand, and solver fixed while systematically varying meeting composition through stakeholder agents, structured deliberation, and governance gates.
• Score: 7.373294811303388
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Transit network design depends not only on the optimization algorithm but also on who shows up to the public hearing. Current practice often collects one-directional comments from self-selected attendees, leaving participant mix as an uncontrolled source of outcome variation. We present AGORA, a framework that holds the network, demand, and solver fixed while systematically varying meeting composition through stakeholder agents, structured deliberation, and governance gates. Across two standard benchmark networks at different scales, we find that (i) aggregate outcomes vary little across compositions, but on tail risk and fairness disparity, representative sampling still tends to outperform skewed compositions; (ii) without deliberation, composition produces no variation at all, showing that deliberation is the mechanism through which who attends affects outcomes; and (iii) governance gates compress cross-profile variance without shifting the average outcome on Mandl, but low acceptance on Mumford0 shows thresholds require instance-specific calibration. These findings reframe participation bias from an uncontrollable input to a process-design problem: even without guaranteed representative attendance, well-structured deliberation and governance criteria can substantially reduce how much outcomes depend on who is in the room.

Related papers

• Fairness-Aware Mixture-of-Experts via Subgroup Reweighting and Gate Regularization [2.6245086561385276]
  We propose an end-to-end Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) framework that corrects subgroup imbalance.<n>We apply subgroup reweighting to correct data imbalance, and introduce gate entropy regularization to prevent routing from collapsing onto subgroup attributes.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed approach improves fairness while maintaining competitive predictive performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-24T05:34:25Z)
• Exploring Agentic Tool-Calling Decisions via Uncertainty-Aligned Reinforcement Learning [63.24624171679711]
  Large language model (LLM)-based agents often make suboptimal tool-use decisions.<n>We propose TRUST, which incorporates uncertainty quantification into reward design as a repulsive force for maintaining uncertainty separation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-05T07:08:34Z)
• Regime-Arrival Uncertainty in Generalization Bounds under Distribution Shift [0.0]
  This paper proposes a framework that generalizes regime-aware models by quantifying the extra risk due to regime composition mismatch.<n>We obtain an exact decomposition, separating regime mismatch from regime sensitivity.<n>The proposed penalty is an ex post realized generalization gap, whereas the training-only estimator does not show significant correlation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-01T06:04:42Z)
• Ensemble-size-dependence of deep-learning post-processing methods that minimize an (un)fair score: motivating examples and a proof-of-concept solution [0.0]
  We introduce trajectory transformers as a proof-of-concept that ensemble-size independence can be achieved.<n>This approach is an adaptation of the Post-processing Ensembles with Transformers (PoET) framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-17T18:59:55Z)
• A Single Revision Step Improves Token-Efficient LLM Reasoning [3.344806691289323]
  We introduce Packet-Conditioned Revision (PACER), a training-free, inference-only framework for large language models.<n>PACER enables reasoning traces to revise their conclusions through a structured coordination step.<n>On challenging competitive math benchmarks, PACER matches or exceeds the accuracy of 256-sample majority voting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T21:28:42Z)
• Every Subtlety Counts: Fine-grained Person Independence Micro-Action Recognition via Distributionally Robust Optimization [36.230001277076376]
  Micro-action Recognition is vital for psychological assessment and human-computer interaction.<n>Existing methods often fail in real-world scenarios because inter-person variability causes the same action to manifest differently.<n>We propose the Person Independence Universal Micro-action Recognition Framework, which integrates Distributionally Robust Optimization principles to learn person-agnostic representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:54:24Z)
• Modeling the Q-Diversity in a Min-max Play Game for Robust Optimization [61.39201891894024]
  Group distributionally robust optimization (group DRO) can minimize the worst-case loss over pre-defined groups. We reformulate the group DRO framework by proposing Q-Diversity. Characterized by an interactive training mode, Q-Diversity relaxes the group identification from annotation into direct parameterization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-20T07:02:27Z)
• Unsupervised Learning of Debiased Representations with Pseudo-Attributes [85.5691102676175]
  We propose a simple but effective debiasing technique in an unsupervised manner. We perform clustering on the feature embedding space and identify pseudoattributes by taking advantage of the clustering results. We then employ a novel cluster-based reweighting scheme for learning debiased representation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-06T05:20:46Z)
• Deconfounding Scores: Feature Representations for Causal Effect Estimation with Weak Overlap [140.98628848491146]
  We introduce deconfounding scores, which induce better overlap without biasing the target of estimation. We show that deconfounding scores satisfy a zero-covariance condition that is identifiable in observed data. In particular, we show that this technique could be an attractive alternative to standard regularizations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-12T18:50:11Z)
• 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)
• Global Distance-distributions Separation for Unsupervised Person Re-identification [93.39253443415392]
  Existing unsupervised ReID approaches often fail in correctly identifying the positive samples and negative samples through the distance-based matching/ranking. We introduce a global distance-distributions separation constraint over the two distributions to encourage the clear separation of positive and negative samples from a global view. We show that our method leads to significant improvement over the baselines and achieves the state-of-the-art performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-01T07:05:39Z)

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.