SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Dominik Peters

Publications and source records attributed to Dominik Peters.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Existence of the Core in Approval-Based Committee Elections

We settle the main open question in the theory of approval-based multi-winner elections: we show that there always exists a committee in the core. The core is a stability and group fairness concept. The proof introduces a new voting rule that optimizes an entropy-like objective function over committees and payment systems. All local optima of this objective function lie in the core, which implies that a core committee can be found in polynomial time.

cs.GT

Finding Representative and Approximately Efficient Committees

In approval-based committee voting, proportional approval voting (PAV) is a well-studied rule that combines proportional representation with Pareto efficiency. However, computing a PAV committee is NP-hard, raising a natural question: Can the proportionality and efficiency properties of PAV be achieved via computationally efficient procedures? We make two contributions toward answering this question. First, building on the known proportionality guarantees of the local-search-based variant of PAV (or local PAV), we systematically study its efficiency properties. We show that local PAV committees are weakly Pareto optimal, meaning that no other committee is strictly preferred by every voter. We also identify limitations: Local PAV guarantees only a $2$-approximation to fractional Pareto optimality ($2$-fPO) and a $2/3$-approximation to the optimal PAV score, and both bounds are tight. In contrast, global PAV is Pareto optimal and satisfies the stronger $\alpha^\star$-fPO guarantee, where $\alpha^\star \approx 1.346$ is the unique solution of $\int_0^{\alpha^\star} \frac{1-e^{-y}}{y} \, dy = 1$, and this approximation is tight. Second, we design a polynomial-time algorithm that combines the best of these guarantees. The committee returned by our algorithm satisfies EJR$+$ (a proportionality guarantee), $\alpha^\star$-fPO, and weak Pareto optimality. It also achieves a $0.79$-approximation to the optimal PAV score, matching the best possible polynomial-time approximation assuming $P \neq NP$. Our algorithm works by pipage rounding a concave relaxation of the PAV objective and using that committee to initialize local PAV, thereby combining global approximation guarantees with local search stability.

cs.GT

Candidate Resignation Monotonicity in Approval-Based Committee Elections

Approval-based committee (ABC) elections select a fixed-size committee of candidates based on voters' approval preferences. We study a setting where elected members may resign and formalize resignation monotonicity: when we re-run the voting rule after resignations, a resignation monotone rule must still elect all remaining previously winning candidates. We show that many prominent ABC rules fail this property, and by connecting our notion to prior work on ABC elections with dynamic candidate sets, we show that the justified representation (JR) axiom is incompatible with resignation monotonicity. It turns out that fractional committee voting does not suffer from this issue: rules based on using maximum flows in the network representation of an election instance can satisfy both representation axioms and resignation monotonicity. We design an integral version of maximum flow, the Maximum Payment Rule (MPR), and show that it satisfies a relaxed form of resignation monotonicity that only requires there to be some way of replacing the resigning candidates in a way that guarantees the PJR+ axiom. MPR is NP-hard to compute in general, but becomes tractable in structured domains. Finally, we study a strategic setting where a losing candidate may introduce new weak candidates to the election to try to become a winner. We show that all resignation monotone rules as well as many sequential rules are immune, but that the PAV rule can be manipulated in this way.

cs.GT

Kemeny Rank Aggregation is NP-Hard for Three Voters

Rank aggregation is the task of combining $n$ input rankings (linear orders) of alternatives into a single output ranking. The Kemeny rank aggregation rule selects the output ranking that minimizes the total Kendall-tau distance to the input rankings, i.e., the total number of adjacent swaps that need to be performed across input rankings so that they are all equal to the output ranking. Dwork et al. (2001) proved that the problem of computing such a ranking is NP-complete for every even $n \ge 4$ and asked whether hardness holds even for $n = 3$. We give a hardness reduction from MAX CUT that proves the problem is NP-complete for $n = 3$. The reduction was found in July 2026 by GPT 5.6 Sol Ultra and simplified in part with help from Claude Fable 5.

cs.GT

Proportional Fairness for Harmful Decisions

We study allocation of (divisible) public bads, where agents incur costs for alternatives and the goal is to pick a lottery over the alternatives. We show that the traditional definitions of the core, a central criterion of proportional representation for allocation of public goods, private goods, and private bads (chores), do not make sense for allocation of public bads. We introduce two formalizations of the core tailored to public bads. Under a structural condition which subsumes allocation of private bads, we show that zero-respecting Lindahl equilibria satisfy both formalizations, exhibit additional fairness guarantees, and strictly generalize competitive equilibria from equal incomes (CEEI) for allocation of private bads. Without this structural condition, we show that Lindahl equilibria exhibit undesirable behaviors, prove sharp impossibility results separating public bads from public goods, but show that a rule using a reduction to public goods recovers one of our formalizations of the core. Our results lay the groundwork for studying fair allocation of public bads, an overlooked yet fundamental problem, and highlight several structural and algorithmic directions that remain open.

cs.GT

Core Existence in Approval-Based Committee Elections with up to Seven Voter Types

In an approval-based committee election, the task is to select a committee of up to $k$ candidates from a set of $m$ candidates based on the preferences of $n$ voters, each of whom approves a subset of the candidates. A central open question is whether there always exists a committee in the core, a stability notion capturing proportional representation. We prove core non-emptiness for all approval-based committee elections with at most seven voters. The proof is based on affine monoid methods and shows that, for $n\le5$, every fractional committee admits a deterministic rounding to an integral committee that preserves each voter's utility up to floors. This no longer applies for larger $n$. However, for $n \in \{6,7\}$, we show that a Lindahl equilibrium can be adapted and rounded to obtain a core committee. For $n \le 5$, we further provide a polynomial-time algorithm for computing a committee in the core. Our arguments work for the weighted voter setting, which implies core existence for instances with up to seven distinct approval sets. We conclude by providing examples where our methods fail for more general models with additive valuations, non-unit candidate costs, or the related Droop core.

cs.GT

Reallocating Wasted Votes in Proportional Parliamentary Elections with Thresholds

In many proportional parliamentary elections, electoral thresholds (typically 3-5%) are used to promote stability and governability by preventing the election of parties with very small representation. However, these thresholds often result in a significant number of "wasted votes" cast for parties that fail to meet the threshold, which reduces representativeness. One proposal is to allow voters to specify replacement votes, by either indicating a second choice party or by ranking a subset of the parties, but there are several ways of deciding on the scores of the parties (and thus the composition of the parliament) given those votes. We introduce a formal model of party voting with thresholds, and compare a variety of party selection rules axiomatically, and experimentally using a dataset we collected during the 2024 European election in France. We identify three particularly attractive rules, called Direct Winners Only (DO), Single Transferable Vote (STV) and Greedy Plurality (GP).

cs.GT

Computing Lindahl Equilibrium for Public Goods with and without Funding Caps

Lindahl equilibrium is a solution concept for allocating a fixed budget across several divisible public goods. It always lies in the weak core, meaning that the equilibrium allocation satisfies desirable stability and proportional fairness properties. We consider a model where agents have separable linear utility functions over the public goods, and the output assigns to each good an amount of spending, summing to at most the available budget. In the uncapped setting, each of the public goods can absorb any amount of funding. In this case, it is known that Lindahl equilibrium is equivalent to maximizing Nash social welfare, and this allocation can be computed by a public-goods variant of the proportional response dynamics. We introduce a new convex programming formulation for computing this solution and show that it is related to Nash welfare maximization through double duality and reformulation. We then show that the proportional response dynamics is equivalent to running mirror descent on our new formulation. Our new formulation has similarities to Shmyrev's convex program for Fisher market equilibrium. In the capped setting, each public good has an upper bound on the amount of funding it can receive, which is a type of constraint that appears in fractional committee selection and participatory budgeting. In this setting, existence of Lindahl equilibrium was only known via fixed-point arguments. The existence of an efficient algorithm computing one has been a long-standing open question. We prove that our new convex program continues to work when the cap constraints are added, and its optimal solutions are Lindahl equilibria. Thus, we establish that approximate Lindahl equilibrium can be efficiently computed. Our result also implies that approximately core-stable allocations can be efficiently computed for the class of separable piecewise-linear concave (SPLC) utilities.

cs.GT

The Core of Approval-Based Committee Elections with Few Seats

In an approval-based committee election, the goal is to select a committee consisting of $k$ out of $m$ candidates, based on $n$ voters who each approve an arbitrary number of the candidates. The core of such an election consists of all committees that satisfy a certain stability property which implies proportional representation. In particular, committees in the core cannot be "objected to" by a coalition of voters who is underrepresented. The notion of the core was proposed in 2016, but it has remained an open problem whether it is always non-empty. We prove that core committees always exist when $k \le 8$, for any number of candidates $m$ and any number of voters $n$, by showing that the Proportional Approval Voting (PAV) rule due to Thiele [1895] always satisfies the core when $k \le 7$ and always selects at least one committee in the core when $k = 8$. We also develop an artificial rule based on recursive application of PAV, and use it to show that the core is non-empty whenever there are $m \le 15$ candidates, for any committee size $k \le m$ and any number of voters $n$. These results are obtained with the help of computer search using linear programs.

cs.GT

Condorcet-Consistent Choice Among Three Candidates

A voting rule is a Condorcet extension if it returns a candidate that beats every other candidate in pairwise majority comparisons whenever one exists. Condorcet extensions have faced criticism due to their susceptibility to variable-electorate paradoxes, especially the reinforcement paradox (Young and Levenglick, 1978) and the no-show paradox (Moulin, 1988). In this paper, we investigate the susceptibility of Condorcet extensions to these paradoxes for the case of exactly three candidates. For the reinforcement paradox, we establish that it must occur for every Condorcet extension when there are at least eight voters and demonstrate that certain refinements of maximin, a voting rule originally proposed by Condorcet (1785), are immune to this paradox when there are at most seven voters. For the no-show paradox, we prove that the only homogeneous Condorcet extensions immune to it are refinements of maximin. We also provide axiomatic characterizations of maximin and two of its refinements, Nanson's rule and leximin, highlighting their suitability for three-candidate elections.

econ.TH

Committee Monotonicity and Proportional Representation for Ranked Preferences

We study committee voting rules under ranked preferences, which map the voters' preference relations to a subset of the alternatives of predefined size. In this setting, the compatibility between proportional representation and committee monotonicity is a fundamental open problem that has been mentioned in several works. We address this research question by designing a new committee voting rule called the Solid Coalition Refinement (SCR) rule that simultaneously satisfies committee monotonicity and Dummett's Proportionality for Solid Coalitions (PSC) property as well as one of its variants called inclusion PSC. This is the first rule known to satisfy both of these properties. Moreover, we show that this is effectively the best that we can hope for as other fairness notions adapted from approval voting are incompatible with committee monotonicity. For truncated preferences, we prove that the SCR rule still satisfies PSC and a property called independence of losing voter blocs, thereby refuting a conjecture of Graham-Squire et al. (2024). Finally, we discuss the consequences of our results in the context of rank aggregation.

cs.GT

Comparing Ways of Obtaining Candidate Orderings from Approval Ballots

To understand and summarize approval preferences and other binary evaluation data, it is useful to order the items on an axis which explains the data. In a political election using approval voting, this could be an ideological left-right axis such that each voter approves adjacent candidates, an analogue of single-peakedness. In a perfect axis, every approval set would be an interval, which is usually not possible, and so we need to choose an axis that gets closest to this ideal. The literature has developed algorithms for optimizing several objective functions (e.g., minimize the number of added approvals needed to get a perfect axis), but provides little help with choosing among different objectives. In this paper, we take a social choice approach and compare 5 different axis selection rules axiomatically, by studying the properties they satisfy. We establish some impossibility theorems, and characterize (within the class of scoring rules) the rule that chooses the axes that maximize the number of votes that form intervals, using the axioms of ballot monotonicity and resistance to cloning. Finally, we study the behavior of the rules on data from French election surveys, on the votes of justices of the US Supreme Court, and on synthetic data.

cs.GT

Generalizing Instant Runoff Voting to Allow Indifferences

Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) is used in elections for many political offices around the world. It allows voters to specify their preferences among candidates as a ranking. We identify a generalization of the rule, called Approval-IRV, that allows voters more freedom by allowing them to give equal preference to several candidates. Such weak orders are a more expressive input format than linear orders, and they help reduce the cognitive effort of voting. Just like standard IRV, Approval-IRV proceeds in rounds by successively eliminating candidates. It interprets each vote as an approval vote for its most-preferred candidates among those that have not been eliminated. At each step, it eliminates the candidate who is approved by the fewest voters. Among the large class of scoring elimination rules, we prove that Approval-IRV is the unique way of extending IRV to weak orders that preserves its characteristic axiomatic properties, in particular independence of clones and respecting a majority's top choices. We also show that Approval-IRV is the unique extension of IRV among rules in this class that satisfies a natural monotonicity property defined for weak orders. Prior work has proposed a different generalization of IRV, which we call Split-IRV, where instead of approving, each vote is interpreted as splitting 1 point equally among its top choices (for example, 0.25 points each if a vote has 4 top choices), and then eliminating the candidate with the lowest score. Split-IRV fails independence of clones, may not respect majority wishes, and fails our monotonicity condition. The multi-winner version of IRV is known as Single Transferable Vote (STV). We prove that Approval-STV continues to satisfy the strong proportional representation properties of STV, underlining that the approval way is the right way of extending the IRV/STV idea to weak orders.

cs.GT

The Squared Kemeny Rule for Averaging Rankings

For the problem of aggregating several rankings into one ranking, Kemeny (1959) proposed two methods: the median rule which selects the ranking with the smallest total swap distance to the input rankings, and the mean rule which minimizes the squared swap distances to the input rankings. The median rule has been extensively studied since and is now known simply as Kemeny's rule. It exhibits majoritarian properties, so for example if more than half of the input rankings are the same, then the output of the rule is the same ranking. We observe that this behavior is undesirable in many rank aggregation settings. For example, when we rank objects by different criteria (quality, price, etc.) and want to aggregate them with specified weights for the criteria, then a criterion with weight 51% should have 51% influence on the output instead of 100%. We show that the Squared Kemeny rule (i.e., the mean rule) behaves this way, by establishing a bound on the distance of the output ranking to any input rankings, as a function of their weights. Furthermore, we give an axiomatic characterization of the Squared Kemeny rule, which mirrors the existing characterization of the Kemeny rule but replaces the majoritarian Condorcet axiom by a proportionality axiom. Finally, we discuss the computation of the rule and show its behavior in a simulation study.

cs.GT

Evaluation of Project Performance in Participatory Budgeting

We study ways of evaluating the performance of losing projects in participatory budgeting (PB) elections by seeking actions that would have led to their victory. We focus on lowering the projects' costs, obtaining additional approvals for them, and asking supporters to refrain from approving other projects: The larger a change is needed, the less successful is the given project. We seek efficient algorithms for computing our measures and we analyze and compare them experimentally. We focus on the greedyAV, Phragm\'en, and Equal-Shares PB rules.

cs.GT

Designing Digital Voting Systems for Citizens: Achieving Fairness and Legitimacy in Participatory Budgeting

Participatory Budgeting (PB) has evolved into a key democratic instrument for resource allocation in cities. Enabled by digital platforms, cities now have the opportunity to let citizens directly propose and vote on urban projects, using different voting input and aggregation rules. However, the choices cities make in terms of the rules of their PB have often not been informed by academic studies on voter behaviour and preferences. Therefore, this work presents the results of behavioural experiments where participants were asked to vote in a fictional PB setting. We identified approaches to designing PB voting that minimise cognitive load and enhance the perceived fairness and legitimacy of the digital process from the citizens' perspective. In our study, participants preferred voting input formats that are more expressive (like rankings and distributing points) over simpler formats (like approval voting). Participants also indicated a desire for the budget to be fairly distributed across city districts and project categories. Participants found the Method of Equal Shares voting rule to be fairer than the conventional Greedy voting rule. These findings offer actionable insights for digital governance, contributing to the development of fairer and more transparent digital systems and collective decision-making processes for citizens.

cs.HC

Proportional Aggregation of Preferences for Sequential Decision Making

We study the problem of fair sequential decision making given voter preferences. In each round, a decision rule must choose a decision from a set of alternatives where each voter reports which of these alternatives they approve. Instead of going with the most popular choice in each round, we aim for proportional representation across rounds, using axioms inspired by the multi-winner voting literature. The axioms require that every group of $\alpha\%$ of the voters that agrees in every round (i.e., approves a common alternative), must approve at least $\alpha\%$ of the decisions. A stronger version of the axioms requires that every group of $\alpha\%$ of the voters that agrees in a $\beta$ fraction of rounds must approve $\beta\cdot\alpha\%$ of the decisions. We show that three attractive voting rules satisfy axioms of this style. One of them (Sequential Phragm\'en) makes its decisions online, and the other two satisfy strengthened versions of the axioms but make decisions semi-online (Method of Equal Shares) or fully offline (Proportional Approval Voting). We present empirical results for these rules based on synthetic data and U.S. political elections. We also run experiments using the moral machine dataset about ethical dilemmas: We train preference models on user responses from different countries and let the models cast votes. We find that aggregating these votes using our rules leads to a more equal utility distribution across demographics than making decisions using a single global preference model.

cs.GT

Participatory Budgeting: Data, Tools, and Analysis

We provide a library of participatory budgeting data (Pabulib) and open source tools (Pabutools and Pabustats) for analysing this data. We analyse how the results of participatory budgeting elections would change if a different selection rule was applied. We provide evidence that the outcomes of the Method of Equal Shares would be considerably fairer than those of the Utilitarian Greedy rule that is currently in use. We also show that the division of the projects into districts and/or categories can in many cases be avoided when using proportional rules. We find that this would increase the overall utility of the voters.

cs.GT