Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userGroup Fairness in Committee Selection
101
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Kangning Wang
Publication date
2019
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
In this paper, we study fairness in committee selection problems. We consider a general notion of fairness via stability: A committee is stable if no coalition of voters can deviate and choose a committee of proportional size, so that all these voters strictly prefer the new committee to the existing one. Our main contribution is to extend this definition to stability of a distribution (or lottery) over committees. We consider two canonical voter preference models: the Approval Set setting where each voter approves a set of candidates and prefers committees with larger intersection with this set; and the Ranking setting where each voter ranks committees based on how much she likes her favorite candidate in a committee. Our main result is to show that stable lotteries always exist for these canonical preference models. Interestingly, given preferences of voters over committees, the procedure for computing an approximately stable lottery is the same for both models and therefore extends to the setting where some voters have the former preference structure and others have the latter. Our existence proof uses the probabilistic method and a new large deviation inequality that may be of independent interest.
rate research
Read More
In the committee selection problem, we are given $m$ candidates, and $n$ voters. Candidates can have different weights. A committee is a subset of candidates, and its weight is the sum of weights of its candidates. Each voter expresses an ordinal ranking over all possible committees. The only assumption we make on preferences is monotonicity: If $S subseteq S$ are two committees, then any voter weakly prefers $S$ to $S$. We study a general notion of group fairness via stability: A committee of given total weight $K$ is stable if no coalition of voters can deviate and choose a committee of proportional weight, so that all these voters strictly prefer the new committee to the existing one. Extending this notion to approximation, for parameter $c ge 1$, a committee $S$ of weight $K$ is said to be $c$-approximately stable if for any other committee $S$ of weight $K$, the fraction of voters that strictly prefer $S$ to $S$ is strictly less than $frac{c K}{K}$. When $c = 1$, this condition is equivalent to classical core stability. The question we ask is: Does a $c$-approximately stable committee of weight at most any given value $K$ always exist for constant $c$? It is relatively easy to show that there exist monotone preferences for which $c ge 2$. However, even for simple and widely studied preference structures, a non-trivial upper bound on $c$ has been elusive. In this paper, we show that $c = O(1)$ for all monotone preference structures. Our proof proceeds via showing an existence result for a randomized notion of stability, and iteratively rounding the resulting fractional solution.
We consider the problem of committee selection from a fixed set of candidates where each candidate has multiple quantifiable attributes. To select the best possible committee, instead of voting for a candidate, a voter is allowed to approve the preferred attributes of a given candidate. Though attribute based preference is addressed in several contexts, committee selection problem with attribute approval of voters has not been attempted earlier. A committee formed on attribute preferences is more likely to be a better representative of the qualities desired by the voters and is less likely to be susceptible to collusion or manipulation. In this work, we provide a formal study of the different aspects of this problem and define properties of weak unanimity, strong unanimity, simple justified representations and compound justified representation, that are required to be satisfied by the selected committee. We show that none of the existing vote/approval aggregation rules satisfy these new properties for attribute aggregation. We describe a greedy approach for attribute aggregation that satisfies the first three properties, but not the fourth, i.e., compound justified representation, which we prove to be NP-complete. Furthermore, we prove that finding a committee with justified representation and the highest approval voting score is NP-complete.
We propose a novel formulation of group fairness in the contextual multi-armed bandit (CMAB) setting. In the CMAB setting a sequential decision maker must at each time step choose an arm to pull from a finite set of arms after observing some context for each of the potential arm pulls. In our model arms are partitioned into two or more sensitive groups based on some protected feature (e.g., age, race, or socio-economic status). Despite the fact that there may be differences in expected payout between the groups, we may wish to ensure some form of fairness between picking arms from the various groups. In this work we explore two definitions of fairness: equal group probability, wherein the probability of pulling an arm from any of the protected groups is the same; and proportional parity, wherein the probability of choosing an arm from a particular group is proportional to the size of that group. We provide a novel algorithm that can accommodate these notions of fairness for an arbitrary number of groups, and provide bounds on the regret for our algorithm. We then validate our algorithm using synthetic data as well as two real-world datasets for intervention settings wherein we want to allocate resources fairly across protected groups.
Course assignment is a wide-spread problem in education and beyond. Often students have preferences for bundles of course seats or course schedules over the week, which need to be considered. The problem is a challenging distributed scheduling task requiring decision support. First-Come First-Served (FCFS) is simple and the most widely used assignment rule in practice, but it leads to inefficient outcomes and envy in the allocation. Recent theoretical results suggest alternatives with attractive economic and computational properties. Bundled Probabilistic Serial (BPS) is a randomized mechanism satisfying ordinal efficiency, envy-freeness, and weak strategy-proofness. This mechanism also runs in polynomial time, which is important for the large problem instances in the field. We report empirical results from a first implementation of BPS at the Technical University of Munich, which allows us to provide important empirical metrics such as the size of the resulting matching, the average rank, the profile, and the popularity of the assignments. These metrics were central for the adoption of BPS. In particular, we compare these metrics to Random Serial Dictatorship with bundle bids (BRSD). The BRSD mechanism is used to simulate the wide-spread First-Come First-Served (FCFS) mechanism and it allows us to compare FCFS (BRSD) and BPS. While theoretically appealing, preference elicitation is a major challenge when considering preferences over exponentially many packages. We introduce tools to elicit preferences which reduce the number of parameters a student needs to a manageable set. The approach together with BPS yields a computationally effective tool to solve course assignment problems with thousands of students, and possibly provides an approach for other distributed scheduling tasks in organizations.
The market economy deals with many interacting agents such as buyers and sellers who are autonomous intelligent agents pursuing their own interests. One such multi-agent system (MAS) that plays an important role in auctions is the combinatorial auctioning system (CAS). We use this framework to define our concept of fairness in terms of what we call as basic fairness and extended fairness. The assumptions of quasilinear preferences and dominant strategies are taken into consideration while explaining fairness. We give an algorithm to ensure fairness in a CAS using a Generalized Vickrey Auction (GVA). We use an algorithm of Sandholm to achieve optimality. Basic and extended fairness are then analyzed according to the dominant strategy solution concept.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
