skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


  • Home
  • Search Results
  • Page 1 of 1

Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Steingart, Alma"

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. (, Osiris)
    Throughout the 1920s Congress failed to pass an apportionment bill. Among the various reasons for the failure was Congress’s inability to decide which method, or algorithm, should govern apportionment. Two competing methods, major fractions and equal proportions, rose to the top and the supporter of each claimed that his method offered the only “fair” and “unbiased” solution to the problem. Following this early debate, this chapter argues that contemporary concerns about algorithm fairness and equality do not emerge out of the nature of their complexity. Rather, they inhere in the incommensurability between mathematical and social rationales and the wide room for interpretation yawning between the two. Not only are definitions of “fairness” multiple but how algorithms are described, either through method or through principle, can lead to completely different results. 
    more » « less
    Full Text Available