Proportional Rankings

In this paper we extend the principle of proportional representation to rankings. We consider the setting where alternatives need to be ranked based on approval preferences. In this setting, proportional representation requires that cohesive groups of voters are represented proportionally in each initial segment of the ranking. Proportional rankings are desirable in situations where initial segments of different lengths may be relevant, e.g., hiring decisions (if it is unclear how many positions are to be filled), the presentation of competing proposals on a liquid democracy platform (if it is unclear how many proposals participants are taking into consideration), or recommender systems (if a ranking has to accommodate different user types). We study the proportional representation provided by several ranking methods and prove theoretical guarantees. Furthermore, we experimentally evaluate these methods and present preliminary evidence as to which methods are most suitable for producing proportional rankings.

[1]  T. Walsh,et al.  PREFLIB: A Library for Preferences , 2013 .

[2]  M. Gallagher Proportionality, disproportionality and electoral systems , 1991 .

[3]  H. Peyton Young,et al.  Fair Representation: Meeting the Ideal of One Man, One Vote , 1982 .

[4]  Haris Aziz,et al.  Justified representation in approval-based committee voting , 2014, Social Choice and Welfare.

[5]  Mark Levene,et al.  Diversity Analysis of Web Search Results , 2015, WebSci.

[6]  Aaas News,et al.  Book Reviews , 1893, Buffalo Medical and Surgical Journal.

[7]  Xavier Mora,et al.  Eleccions mitjançant el vot d'aprovació. El mètode de Phragmén i algunes variants , 2015 .

[8]  Burt L. Monroe,et al.  Fully Proportional Representation , 1995, American Political Science Review.

[9]  Jean-François Laslier,et al.  Multiwinner approval rules as apportionment methods , 2016, AAAI.

[10]  Svante Janson,et al.  Phragmén’s voting methods and justified representation , 2017, AAAI.

[11]  Friedrich Pukelsheim,et al.  Proportional Representation: Apportionment Methods and Their Applications , 2013 .

[12]  S. Berg Paradox of voting under an urn model: The effect of homogeneity , 1985 .

[13]  Stanley Burnton Proportionality , 2011 .

[14]  Christopher Olston,et al.  Search result diversity for informational queries , 2011, WWW.

[15]  Piotr Faliszewski,et al.  Multiwinner Voting: A New Challenge for Social Choice Theory , 2017 .

[16]  Edith Elkind,et al.  Proportional Justified Representation , 2016, AAAI.

[17]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[18]  Eduardo C. Xavier,et al.  A note on a Maximum k-Subset Intersection problem , 2012, Inf. Process. Lett..

[19]  Evaggelia Pitoura,et al.  Search result diversification , 2010, SGMD.

[20]  W. Lucas Fair Representation: Meeting the Ideal of One Man, One Vote. By Michel L. Balinski and H. Peyton Young , 1985 .

[21]  Jean-François Laslier,et al.  Why not proportional? , 2012, Math. Soc. Sci..

[22]  Ying Wang,et al.  Learning for Search Results Diversification in Twitter , 2016, WAIM.

[23]  Yuchen Zhang,et al.  Characterizing search intent diversity into click models , 2011, WWW.

[24]  Svante Janson,et al.  Phragmén's and Thiele's election methods , 2016, ArXiv.