arXiv:2503. 01985v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: In the classic committee election setting each voter approves a subset of candidates and the goal is to select $k$ winners based on these preferences.
arXiv:2606. 23853v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This paper studies strict majority reasoning in finite electorates using so-called $\textit{social decision frames}$: finite sets of voters equipped with distinguished families of coalitions interpreted as those voting blocs evaluated to form a strict majority.
This paper studies strict majority reasoning in finite electorates using so-called $\textit{social decision frames}$: finite sets of voters equipped with distinguished families of coalitions interpreted as those voting blocs evaluated to form a strict majority. A coherence criterion for qualitative majority judgments is identified and shown to give an exact characterization for representability of strict majorities by finitely additive measures.
arXiv:2608. 11500v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Full justified representation (FJR) is among the strongest known satisfiable proportionality axioms for approval-based committee elections.
arXiv:2606. 11692v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deliberative polling promises to improve collective decision-making by exposing shareholders to a broad range of arguments before they vote.
arXiv:2606. 08098v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Majority voting over sampled answers is the dominant unsupervised aggregator for multi-sample LLM inference.
arXiv:2601. 23221v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As acquiring reliable ground-truth labels is usually costly, or infeasible, crowdsourcing and aggregation of noisy human annotations is the typical resort.
arXiv:2304. 13917v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: In recent years, there has been a surge in effort to formalize notions of fairness in machine learning.
arXiv:2606. 30116v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Pairwise preference data is widely used for training and evaluating language models (e.
As users increasingly turn to Large Language Models (LLMs) for information and advice on political matters, particularly during election periods, the political preferences expressed by these systems have become a matter of public interest. Prior research has shown that interactions with LLMs can influence users' political attitudes and choices, raising questions about how these models themselves evaluate political actors.
arXiv:2407. 14766v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: This paper presents a philosophical and experimental study of fairness interventions in AI classification, centered on the explainability and transparency of corrective methods, and on the opposition between two fairness criteria, namely Demographic Parity and Equalized Odds.
arXiv:2605. 13362v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Computational social choice and algorithmic decision theory offer rich aggregation theory but no end-to-end process for egalitarian self-governance: aggregation, deliberation, amendment, and consensus are each considered in isolation, with key metric-space aggregators being NP-hard.
arXiv:2608. 06940v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM judge panels are a standard evaluation tool, but prior work reports highly correlated panel errors: nine judges provide roughly the effective information of two independent ones, and aggregation closes only a small fraction of the gap.