On the dominant set selection problem and its application to value alignment

Decision makers can often be confronted with the need to select a subset of objects from a set of candidate objects by just counting on preferences regarding the objects’ features. Here we formalise this problem as the dominant set selection problem . Solving this problem amounts to finding the preferences over all possible sets of objects. We accomplish so by: (i) grounding the preferences over features to preferences over the objects themselves; and (ii) lifting these preferences to preferences over all possible sets of objects. This is achieved by combining lex-cel –a method from the literature—with our novel anti-lex-cel method, which we formally (and thoroughly) study. Furthermore, we provide a binary integer program encoding to solve the problem. Finally, we illustrate our overall approach by applying it to the selection of value-aligned norm systems.

[1]  A. Roth,et al.  Two-sided matching , 1990 .

[2]  Ulrich Pferschy,et al.  Committee Selection with a Weight Constraint Based on Lexicographic Rankings of Individuals , 2009, ADT.

[3]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Moral Values in Norm Decision Making , 2018, AAMAS.

[4]  Denis Bouyssou,et al.  Some remarks on the notion of compensation in MCDM , 1986 .

[5]  Roman Słowiński,et al.  Questions guiding the choice of a multicriteria decision aiding method , 2013 .

[6]  L. S. Shapley,et al.  College Admissions and the Stability of Marriage , 2013, Am. Math. Mon..

[7]  Alvin E. Roth,et al.  Chapter 16 Two-sided matching , 1992 .

[8]  P. Pattanaik,et al.  An axiomatic characterization of the lexicographic maximin extension of an ordering over a set to the power set , 1984 .

[9]  W. Bossert,et al.  Ranking Sets of Objects , 2001 .

[10]  Maite López-Sánchez,et al.  A Qualitative Approach to Composing Value-Aligned Norm Systems , 2020, AAMAS.

[11]  Walter Bossert,et al.  Ranking Opportunity Sets: A n Ax-iomatic Approach , 1994 .

[12]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Abstract Argumentation and Values , 2009, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence.

[13]  Ganesh Ram Santhanam.  Qualitative optimization in software engineering: A short survey , 2016, J. Syst. Softw..

[14]  H. Young,et al.  Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications , 2015 .

[15]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon.  Value-Based Reasoning and Norms , 2016, ECAI.

[16]  Bruno Escoffier,et al.  Social Ranking Manipulability for the CP-Majority, Banzhaf and Lexicographic Excellence Solutions , 2020, IJCAI.

[17]  Ritxar Arlegi.  A note on Bossert, Pattanaik and Xu's “Choice under complete uncertainty: axiomatic characterization of some decision rules” , 2002 .

[18]  Stefano Moretti,et al.  Some Axiomatic and Algorithmic Perspectives on the Social Ranking Problem , 2017, ADT.

[19]  S. Greco,et al.  On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness , 2019 .

[20]  S. Greco,et al.  Axiomatization of utility, outranking and decision-rule preference models for multiple-criteria classification problems under partial inconsistency with the dominance principle , 2002 .

[21]  John-Jules Ch. Meyer,et al.  Reasoning About Opportunistic Propensity in Multi-agent Systems , 2017, AAMAS Workshops.

[22]  Stefano Moretti,et al.  An Ordinal Banzhaf Index for Social Ranking , 2019, IJCAI.

[23]  Adrian Haret,et al.  Ceteris paribus majority for social ranking , 2018, IJCAI.

[24]  Roberto Lucchetti,et al.  Ranking objects from a preference relation over their subsets , 2018, Soc. Choice Welf..

[25]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Exploiting Moral Values to Choose the Right Norms , 2018, AIES.