2019
DOI: 10.1007/s10726-019-09634-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Rule for Committee Selection with Soft Diversity Constraints

Abstract: Committee selection with diversity or distributional constraints is a ubiquitous problem. However, many of the formal approaches proposed so far have certain drawbacks including (1) computationally intractability in general, and (2) inability to suggest a solution for certain instances where the hard constraints cannot be met. We propose a practical and polynomial-time algorithm for diverse committee selection that draws on the idea of using soft bounds and satisfies natural axioms.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…When individuals have multiple types, there are two natural conventions, namely one-for-all and one-for-one, on how many reserved seats an individual takes up (to be consistent with the majority of text) or how reserved positions are accounted for [39]. Under the one-for-all convention, an individual takes the reserved seats of all types she satisfies [9,10,22]. For example, an aboriginal girl could take up one seat reserved for girls and one seat reserved for aboriginals.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…When individuals have multiple types, there are two natural conventions, namely one-for-all and one-for-one, on how many reserved seats an individual takes up (to be consistent with the majority of text) or how reserved positions are accounted for [39]. Under the one-for-all convention, an individual takes the reserved seats of all types she satisfies [9,10,22]. For example, an aboriginal girl could take up one seat reserved for girls and one seat reserved for aboriginals.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They used a heuristic to deal with non-nested common quotas and their algorithm does not guarantee a fair outcome. Aziz [9] considers the one-for-all convention for diversity and proposed an algorithm for a choice rule that uses minimum quotas to [16] examined the complexity of multiwinner voting with diversity constraints under the one-for-all convention.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In other words, the set of displayed reviews should work well together in providing an accurate overview of the product category. There are alternative fair group formation algorithms [6,11,24,27,31,32], but these do not focus on diversity of experience, which has long been of interest in sociology, psychology, and business management [18,20,21,26].…”
Section: Fair Clustering and Group Formationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Independently, [4] introduce a very similar model where they present approximation algorithms for submodular scores. The work of [1] considers the question of how to elect a committee if the constraints cannot be satisfied, and presents an algorithm for finding an ordinally-optimal committee that comes the closest to satisfying the constraints. Also related is the work on apportionment of [13] which considers how to apportion seats with an arbitrary number of diversity constraints.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this paper we have interpreted this approach as optimising the ordinal ranking that is the outcome of the cardinal scores of a scoring rule, but scoring rules are just one of many voting procedures that can be used to elect a committee. A purely ordinal model is used by [1], but it is a very specific one -we are given a global preference order over the candidate and have to choose an optimal committee accordingly. This could be interpreted as optimising a best-k rule in the sense of [5].…”
Section: Future Directionsmentioning
confidence: 99%