arXiv subjects

Joshua C. Yang

Publications and source records attributed to Joshua C. Yang.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Belief Engine: Configurable and Inspectable Stance Dynamics in Multi-Agent LLM Deliberation

LLM-based agents are increasingly used to simulate deliberative interactions such as negotiation, conflict resolution, and multi-turn opinion exchange. Yet generated transcripts often do not reveal why an agent's stance changes: movement may reflect evidence uptake, anchoring, role drift, echoing, or changed prompt and retrieval context. We introduce the Belief Engine (BE), an auditable belief-update layer that treats "belief" as an evidential state over a proposition and exposes it as scalar stance. BE extracts arguments into structured memory and updates stance with a log-odds rule controlled by evidence uptake u and prior anchoring a. Across multiple base LLMs, parameter sweeps show that these controls reliably shape stance dynamics while preserving an evidence-level update trail. On DEBATE, a human deliberation dataset with pre/post opinions, BE best reconstructs participants whose final stance follows extracted evidence; stable and evidence-opposed cases instead point to anchoring or factors outside the extracted evidence stream. BE provides configurable infrastructure for studying evidence-grounded deliberation, where openness, commitment, convergence, and disagreement can be tied to explicit update assumptions rather than hidden prompt effects.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

Upgrading Democracies with Fairer Voting Methods

Voting methods are instrumental design elements of democracies. Citizens use them to express and aggregate their preferences to reach a collective decision. However, voting outcomes can be as sensitive to voting rules as they are to people's voting choices. Despite significance and interdisciplinary scientific progress, several democracies keep relying on outdated voting methods that do not fit modern, pluralistic societies well, while lacking social innovation. Here, we demonstrate how one can upgrade real-world democracies, namely by using alternative preferential voting methods such as cumulative voting and the method of equal shares designed for a proportional representation of voters' preferences. We rigorously evaluate the striking voting outcomes of these fair voting methods in a new participatory budgeting approach applied in the city of Aarau, Switzerland, including past and follow-up evidence. Results show more winning projects with the same budget. They also show broader geographic and preference representation of citizens by the elected projects, in particular for voters who used to be under-represented. We provide causal evidence showing that citizens prefer proportional voting methods, which possess strong legitimacy without the need of very specialized technical explanations. We also reveal strong underlying democratic values exhibited by citizens who support fair voting methods such as altruism and compromise. These findings come with the momentum to unleash a new and long-awaited participation blueprint of how to upgrade democracies globally.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Komitee Equal Shares: Choosing Together as Voters and as Groups with a Co-designed Virtual Budget Algorithm

Public funding processes demand fairness, learning, and outcomes that participants can understand. We introduce Komitee Equal Shares, a priceable virtual-budget allocation framework that integrates two signals: in voter mode, participants cast point votes; in evaluator mode, small groups assess proposals against collectively defined impact fields. The framework extends the Method of Equal Shares by translating both signals into virtual spending power and producing voting receipts. We deployed the framework in the 2025 Kultur Komitee in Winterthur, Switzerland. Our contributions are: (1) a clear separation of decision modes, addressing a gap in social choice that typically treats participatory budgeting as preference aggregation while citizens also see themselves as evaluators; and (2) the design of voting receipts that operationalise priceability into participant-facing explanations, making proportional allocations legible and traceable. The framework generalises to participatory grant-making and budgeting, offering a model where citizens act as voters and evaluators within one proportional, explainable allocation.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Bridging Voting and Deliberation with Algorithms: Field Insights from vTaiwan and Kultur Komitee

Democratic processes increasingly aim to integrate large-scale voting with face-to-face deliberation, addressing the challenge of reconciling individual preferences with collective decision-making. This work introduces new methods that use algorithms and computational tools to bridge online voting with face-to-face deliberation, tested in two real-world scenarios: Kultur Komitee 2024 (KK24) and vTaiwan. These case studies highlight the practical applications and impacts of the proposed methods. We present three key contributions: (1) Preference-based Clustering for Deliberation (PCD), which enables both in-depth and broad discussions in deliberative settings by computing homogeneous and heterogeneous group compositions with balanced and adjustable group sizes; (2) Human-in-the-loop MES, a practical method that enhances the Method of Equal Shares (MES) algorithm with real-time digital feedback. This builds algorithmic trust by giving participants full control over how much decision-making is delegated to the voting aggregation algorithm as compared to deliberation; and (3) the ReadTheRoom deliberation method, which uses opinion space mapping to identify agreement and divergence, along with spectrum-based preference visualisation to track opinion shifts during deliberation. This approach enhances transparency by clarifying collective sentiment and fosters collaboration by encouraging participants to engage constructively with differing perspectives. By introducing these actionable frameworks, this research extends in-person deliberation with scalable digital methods that address the complexities of modern decision-making in participatory processes.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

LLM Voting: Human Choices and AI Collective Decision Making

This paper investigates the voting behaviors of Large Language Models (LLMs), specifically GPT-4 and LLaMA-2, their biases, and how they align with human voting patterns. Our methodology involved using a dataset from a human voting experiment to establish a baseline for human preferences and conducting a corresponding experiment with LLM agents. We observed that the choice of voting methods and the presentation order influenced LLM voting outcomes. We found that varying the persona can reduce some of these biases and enhance alignment with human choices. While the Chain-of-Thought approach did not improve prediction accuracy, it has potential for AI explainability in the voting process. We also identified a trade-off between preference diversity and alignment accuracy in LLMs, influenced by different temperature settings. Our findings indicate that LLMs may lead to less diverse collective outcomes and biased assumptions when used in voting scenarios, emphasizing the need for cautious integration of LLMs into democratic processes.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

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↗

arXiv2023

A Taxonomy for Blockchain-based Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Networks (DePIN)

As digitalization and technological advancements continue to shape the infrastructure landscape, the emergence of blockchain-based decentralized physical infrastructure networks (DePINs) has gained prominence. However, a systematic categorization of DePIN components and their interrelationships is still missing. To address this gap, we conduct a literature review and analysis of existing frameworks and derived a taxonomy of DePIN systems from a conceptual architecture. Our taxonomy encompasses three key dimensions: distributed ledger technology, cryptoeconomic design and physicial infrastructure network. Within each dimension, we identify and define relevant components and attributes, establishing a clear hierarchical structure. Moreover, we illustrate the relationships and dependencies among the identified components, highlighting the interplay between governance models, hardware architectures, networking protocols, token mechanisms, and distributed ledger technologies. This taxonomy provides a foundation for understanding and classifying diverse DePIN networks, serving as a basis for future research and facilitating knowledge exchange, fostering collaboration and standardization within the emerging field of decentralized physical infrastructure networks.

cs.NI↗