More Like this

1. Fairer Together: Mitigating Disparate Exposure in Kemeny Rank Aggregation

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3593013.3594085  

   Cachel, Kathleen ; Rundensteiner, Elke ( June 2023 , 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency)

   In social choice, traditional Kemeny rank aggregation combines the preferences of voters, expressed as rankings, into a single consensus ranking without consideration for how this ranking may unfairly affect marginalized groups (i.e., racial or gender). Developing fair rank aggregation methods is critical due to their societal influence in applications prioritizing job applicants, funding proposals, and scheduling medical patients. In this work, we introduce the Fair Exposure Kemeny Aggregation Problem (FairExp-kap) for combining vast and diverse voter preferences into a single ranking that is not only a suitable consensus, but ensures opportunities are not withheld from marginalized groups. In formalizing FairExp-kap, we extend the fairness of exposure notion from information retrieval to the rank aggregation context and present a complimentary metric for voter preference representation. We design algorithms for solving FairExp-kap that explicitly account for position bias, a common ranking-based concern that end-users pay more attention to higher ranked candidates. epik solves FairExp-kap exactly by incorporating non-pairwise fairness of exposure into the pairwise Kemeny optimization; while the approximate epira is a candidate swapping algorithm, that guarantees ranked candidate fairness. Utilizing comprehensive synthetic simulations and six real-world datasets, we show the efficacy of our approach illustrating that we succeed in mitigating disparate group exposure unfairness in consensus rankings, while maximally representing voter preferences. 

   more » « less
2. Most Expected Winner: An Interpretation of Winners over Uncertain Voter Preferences

   Haoyue Ping and Julia Stoyanovich ( June 2023 , Proceedings of the '23 International Conference on the Management of Data (ACM SIGMOD 2023))

   It remains an open question how to determine the winner of an election given incomplete or uncertain voter preferences. One solution is to assume some probability space for the voting profile and declare that the candidates having the best chance of winning are the (co-)winners. We refer to this interpretation as the Most Probable Winner (MPW). In this paper, we focus on elections that use positional scoring rules, and propose an alternative winner interpretation, the Most Expected Winner (MEW), according to the expected performance of the candidates. We separate the uncertainty in voter preferences into the generation step and the observation step, which gives rise to a unified voting profile combining both incomplete and probabilistic voting profiles. We use this framework to establish the theoretical hardness of MEW over incomplete voter preferences, and then identify a collection of tractable cases for a variety of voting profiles, including those based on the popular Repeated Insertion Model (RIM) and its special case, the Mallows model. We develop solvers customized for various voter preference types to quantify the candidate performance for the individual voters, and propose a pruning strategy that optimizes computation. The performance of the proposed solvers and pruning strategy is evaluated extensively on real and synthetic benchmarks, showing that our methods are practical. 

   more » « less
3. Satisfying complex top- k fairness constraints by preference substitutions

   https://doi.org/10.14778/3565816.3565832  

   Islam, Md. Mouinul ; Wei, Dong ; Schieber, Baruch ; Roy, Senjuti Basu ( October 2022 , Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment)

   Given m users (voters), where each user casts her preference for a single item (candidate) over n items (candidates) as a ballot, the preference aggregation problem returns k items (candidates) that have the k highest number of preferences (votes). Our work studies this problem considering complex fairness constraints that have to be satisfied via proportionate representations of different values of the group protected attribute(s) in the top- k results. Precisely, we study the margin finding problem under single ballot substitutions , where a single substitution amounts to removing a vote from candidate i and assigning it to candidate j and the goal is to minimize the number of single ballot substitutions needed to guarantee that the top-k results satisfy the fairness constraints. We study several variants of this problem considering how top- k fairness constraints are defined, (i) MFBinaryS and MFMultiS are defined when the fairness (proportionate representation) is defined over a single, binary or multivalued, protected attribute, respectively; (ii) MF-Multi2 is studied when top- k fairness is defined over two different protected attributes; (iii) MFMulti3+ investigates the margin finding problem, considering 3 or more protected attributes. We study these problems theoretically, and present a suite of algorithms with provable guarantees. We conduct rigorous large scale experiments involving multiple real world datasets by appropriately adapting multiple state-of-the-art solutions to demonstrate the effectiveness and scalability of our proposed methods. 

   more » « less
4. The Swing Voter Paradox: Electoral Politics in a Nationalized Era

   Shiro Kuriwaki ( January 2021 , Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Government, Harvard University)

   With each successive election since at least 1994, congressional elections in the United States have transitioned toward nationalized two-party government. Fewer voters split their tickets for different parties between President and Congress. Regional blocs and incumbency voting --- a key feature of U.S. elections in the latter 20th century --- appear to have given way to strong party discipline among candidates and nationalized partisanship among voters. Observers of modern American politics are therefore tempted to write off the importance of the swing voter, defined here as voters who are indifferent between the two parties and thus likely to split their ticket or switch their party support. By assembling data from historical elections (1950 -- 2020), surveys (2008 -- 2018), and cast vote record data (2010 -- 2018), and through developing statistical methods to analyze such data, I argue that although they comprise a smaller portion of the electorate, each swing voter is disproportionately decisive in modern American politics, a phenomenon I call the swing voter paradox. Historical comparisons across Congressional, state executive, and state legislative elections confirm the decline in aggregate measures of ticket splitting suggested in past work. But the same indicator has not declined nearly as much in county legislative or county sheriff elections (Chapter 1). Ticket splitters and party switchers tend to be voters with low news interest and ideological moderate. Consistent with a spatial voting model with valence, voters also become ticket splitters when incumbents run (Chapter 2). I then provide one of the first direct measures of ticket splitting instate and local office using cast vote records. I find that ticket splitting is more prevalent in state and local elections (Chapter 3). This is surprising given the conventional wisdom that party labels serve as heuristics and down-ballot elections are low information environments. A major barrier for existing studies of the swing voter lies in the measurement from incomplete electoral data. Traditional methods struggle to extract information about subgroups from large surveys or cast vote records, because of small subgroup samples, multi-dimensional data, and systematic missingness. I therefore develop a procedure for reweighting surveys to small areas through expanding poststratification targets (Chapter 4), and a clustering algorithm for survey or ballot data with multiple offices to extract interpretable voting blocs (Chapter 5). I provide open-source software to implement both methods. These findings challenge a common characterization of modern American politics as one dominated by rigidly polarized parties and partisans. The picture that emerges instead is one where swing voters are rare but can dramatically decide the party in power, and where no single demographic group is a swing voter. Instead of entrenching elections into red states and blue states, nationalization may heighten the role of the persuadable voter. 

   more » « less
5. BVOT: Self-Tallying boardroom voting with oblivious transfer

   Javani, Farid ; Sherman, Alan T. ( January 2021 , International Journal of Information Security, submitted)

   null (Ed.)

   A boardroom election is an election with a small number of voters carried out with public communications. We present BVOT, a self-tallying boardroom voting protocol with ballot secrecy, fairness (no tally information is available before the polls close), and dispute-freeness (voters can observe that all voters correctly followed the protocol). BVOT works by using a multiparty threshold homomorphic encryption system in which each candidate is associated with a set of masked primes. Each voter engages in an oblivious transfer with an untrusted distributor: the voter selects the index of a prime associated with a candidate and receives the selected prime in masked form. The voter then casts their vote by encrypting their masked prime and broadcasting it to everyone. The distributor does not learn the voter's choice, and no one learns the mapping between primes and candidates until the audit phase. By hiding the mapping between primes and candidates, BVOT provides voters with insufficient information to carry out effective cheating. The threshold feature prevents anyone from computing any partial tally---until everyone has voted. Multiplying all votes, their decryption shares, and the unmasking factor yields a product of the primes each raised to the number of votes received. In contrast to some existing boardroom voting protocols, BVOT does not rely on any zero-knowledge proof; instead, it uses oblivious transfer to assure ballot secrecy and correct vote casting. Also, BVOT can handle multiple candidates in one election. BVOT prevents cheating by hiding crucial information: an attempt to increase the tally of one candidate might increase the tally of another candidate. After all votes are cast, any party can tally the votes. 

   more » « less