Approximately stable committee selection
Zhihao Jiang, Kamesh Munagala, Kangning Wang
Abstract
In the committee selection problem, we are given m candidates, and n voters. Candidates can have different weights. A committee is a subset of candidates, and its weight is the sum of weights of its candidates. Each voter expresses an ordinal ranking over all possible committees. The only assumption we make on preferences is monotonicity: If S ⊆ S ′ are two committees, then any voter weakly prefers S ′ to S.
We study a general notion of group fairness via stability: A committee of given total weight K is stable if no coalition of voters can deviate and choose a committee of proportional weight, so that all these voters strictly prefer the new committee to the existing one. Extending this notion to approximation, for parameter c ≥ 1, a committee S of weight K is said to be c-approximately stable if for any other committee S ′ of weight K ′ , the fraction of voters that strictly prefer S ′ to S is strictly less than cK ′ K . When c = 1, this condition is equivalent to classical core stability. The question we ask is: Does a c-approximately stable committee of weight at most any given value K always exist for constant c? It is relatively easy to show that there exist monotone preferences for which c ≥ 2. However, even for simple and widely studied preference structures, a non-trivial upper bound on c has been elusive.
In this paper, we show that c = O(1) for all monotone preference structures. Our proof proceeds via showing an existence result for a randomized notion of stability, and iteratively rounding the resulting fractional solution.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 6fa3c2df-045e-42ba-b35b-fd2a18f59baaCited by top-tier papers19
- Proportional Participatory Budgeting with Additive UtilitiesDominik Peters, Grzegorz Pierczynski, Piotr SkowronNeurIPS 2021 · 168 citations
- Approval-Based ApportionmentMarkus Brill, Paul Gölz, Dominik Peters, Ulrike Schmidt-Kraepelin et al.AAAI 2020 · 51 citations
- Resolving the Optimal Metric Distortion ConjectureVasilis Gkatzelis, Daniel Halpern, Nisarg ShahFOCS 2020 · 44 citations
- Proportional Fairness in Clustering: A Social Choice PerspectiveLeon Kellerhals, Jannik PetersNeurIPS 2024 · 40 citations
- Market-Based Explanations of Collective DecisionsDominik Peters, Grzegorz Pierczynski, Nisarg Shah, Piotr SkowronAAAI 2021 · 36 citations
Related papers
- Approximate Core for Committee Selection via Multilinear Extension and Market ClearingKamesh Munagala, Yiheng Shen, Kangning Wang, Zhiyi WangSODA 2022 · 14 citations
- On the Edge of Core (Non-)Emptiness: An Automated Reasoning Approach to Approval-Based Multi-Winner VotingRatip Emin Berker, Emanuel Tewolde, Vincent Conitzer, Mingyu Guo et al.AAAI 2026 · 4 citations
- Six Candidates Suffice to Win a Voter MajorityMoses Charikar, Alexandra Lassota, Prasanna Ramakrishnan, Adrian Vetta et al.STOC 2025 · 1 citation
- Maintaining Proportional Committees with Dynamic Candidate SetsChris Dong, Jannik PetersICML 2025
- Approximate Group Fairness for ClusteringBo Li, Lijun Li, Ankang Sun, Chenhao Wang et al.ICML 2021 · 28 citations
