Showing 1–14 of 14 results for author: Halpern, D

Federated Assemblies

Authors: Daniel Halpern, Ariel D. Procaccia, Ehud Shapiro, Nimrod Talmon

Abstract: A citizens' assembly is a group of people who are randomly selected to represent a larger population in a deliberation. While this approach has successfully strengthened democracy, it has certain limitations that suggest the need for assemblies to form and associate more organically. In response, we propose federated assemblies, where assemblies are interconnected, and each parent assembly is sele… ▽ More A citizens' assembly is a group of people who are randomly selected to represent a larger population in a deliberation. While this approach has successfully strengthened democracy, it has certain limitations that suggest the need for assemblies to form and associate more organically. In response, we propose federated assemblies, where assemblies are interconnected, and each parent assembly is selected from members of its child assemblies. The main technical challenge is to develop random selection algorithms that meet new representation constraints inherent in this hierarchical structure. We design and analyze several algorithms that provide different representation guarantees under various assumptions on the structure of the underlying graph. △ Less

Submitted 29 May, 2024; originally announced May 2024.

Axioms for AI Alignment from Human Feedback

Authors: Luise Ge, Daniel Halpern, Evi Micha, Ariel D. Procaccia, Itai Shapira, Yevgeniy Vorobeychik, Junlin Wu

Abstract: In the context of reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), the reward function is generally derived from maximum likelihood estimation of a random utility model based on pairwise comparisons made by humans. The problem of learning a reward function is one of preference aggregation that, we argue, largely falls within the scope of social choice theory. From this perspective, we can evalua… ▽ More In the context of reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), the reward function is generally derived from maximum likelihood estimation of a random utility model based on pairwise comparisons made by humans. The problem of learning a reward function is one of preference aggregation that, we argue, largely falls within the scope of social choice theory. From this perspective, we can evaluate different aggregation methods via established axioms, examining whether these methods meet or fail well-known standards. We demonstrate that both the Bradley-Terry-Luce Model and its broad generalizations fail to meet basic axioms. In response, we develop novel rules for learning reward functions with strong axiomatic guarantees. A key innovation from the standpoint of social choice is that our problem has a linear structure, which greatly restricts the space of feasible rules and leads to a new paradigm that we call linear social choice. △ Less

Submitted 23 May, 2024; originally announced May 2024.

Computing Voting Rules with Elicited Incomplete Votes

Authors: Daniel Halpern, Safwan Hossain, Jamie Tucker-Foltz

Abstract: Motivated by the difficulty of specifying complete ordinal preferences over a large set of $m$ candidates, we study voting rules that are computable by querying voters about $t < m$ candidates. Generalizing prior works that focused on specific instances of this problem, our paper fully characterizes the set of positional scoring rules that can be computed for any $1 \leq t < m$, which notably does… ▽ More Motivated by the difficulty of specifying complete ordinal preferences over a large set of $m$ candidates, we study voting rules that are computable by querying voters about $t < m$ candidates. Generalizing prior works that focused on specific instances of this problem, our paper fully characterizes the set of positional scoring rules that can be computed for any $1 \leq t < m$, which notably does not include plurality. We then extend this to show a similar impossibility result for single transferable vote (elimination voting). These negative results are information-theoretic and agnostic to the number of queries. Finally, for scoring rules that are computable with limited-sized queries, we give parameterized upper and lower bounds on the number of such queries a deterministic or randomized algorithm must make to determine the score-maximizing candidate. While there is no gap between our bounds for deterministic algorithms, identifying the exact query complexity for randomized algorithms is a challenging open problem, of which we solve one special case. △ Less

Submitted 16 February, 2024; originally announced February 2024.

On the Existence of Envy-Free Allocations Beyond Additive Valuations

Authors: Gerdus Benadè, Daniel Halpern, Alexandros Psomas, Paritosh Verma

Abstract: We study the problem of fairly allocating $m$ indivisible items among $n$ agents. Envy-free allocations, in which each agent prefers her bundle to the bundle of every other agent, need not exist in the worst case. However, when agents have additive preferences and the value $v_{i,j}$ of agent $i$ for item $j$ is drawn independently from a distribution $D_i$, envy-free allocations exist with high p… ▽ More We study the problem of fairly allocating $m$ indivisible items among $n$ agents. Envy-free allocations, in which each agent prefers her bundle to the bundle of every other agent, need not exist in the worst case. However, when agents have additive preferences and the value $v_{i,j}$ of agent $i$ for item $j$ is drawn independently from a distribution $D_i$, envy-free allocations exist with high probability when $m \in Ω( n \log n / \log \log n )$. In this paper, we study the existence of envy-free allocations under stochastic valuations far beyond the additive setting. We introduce a new stochastic model in which each agent's valuation is sampled by first fixing a worst-case function, and then drawing a uniformly random renaming of the items, independently for each agent. This strictly generalizes known settings; for example, $v_{i,j} \sim D_i$ may be seen as picking a random (instead of a worst-case) additive function before renaming. We prove that random renaming is sufficient to ensure that envy-free allocations exist with high probability in very general settings. When valuations are non-negative and ``order-consistent,'' a valuation class that generalizes additive, budget-additive, unit-demand, and single-minded agents, SD-envy-free allocations (a stronger notion of fairness than envy-freeness) exist for $m \in ω(n^2)$ when $n$ divides $m$, and SD-EFX allocations exist for all $m \in ω(n^2)$. The dependence on $n$ is tight, that is, for $m \in O(n^2)$ envy-free allocations don't exist with constant probability. For the case of arbitrary valuations (allowing non-monotone, negative, or mixed-manna valuations) and $n=2$ agents, we prove envy-free allocations exist with probability $1 - Θ(1/m)$ (and this is tight). △ Less

Submitted 18 July, 2023; originally announced July 2023.

Optimal Engagement-Diversity Tradeoffs in Social Media

Authors: Fabian Baumann, Daniel Halpern, Ariel D. Procaccia, Iyad Rahwan, Itai Shapira, Manuel Wuthrich

Abstract: Social media platforms are known to optimize user engagement with the help of algorithms. It is widely understood that this practice gives rise to echo chambers\emdash users are mainly exposed to opinions that are similar to their own. In this paper, we ask whether echo chambers are an inevitable result of high engagement; we address this question in a novel model. Our main theoretical results est… ▽ More Social media platforms are known to optimize user engagement with the help of algorithms. It is widely understood that this practice gives rise to echo chambers\emdash users are mainly exposed to opinions that are similar to their own. In this paper, we ask whether echo chambers are an inevitable result of high engagement; we address this question in a novel model. Our main theoretical results establish bounds on the maximum engagement achievable under a diversity constraint, for suitable measures of engagement and diversity; we can therefore quantify the worst-case tradeoff between these two objectives. Our empirical results, based on real data from Twitter, chart the Pareto frontier of the engagement-diversity tradeoff. △ Less

Submitted 6 March, 2023; originally announced March 2023.

Representation with Incomplete Votes

Authors: Daniel Halpern, Gregory Kehne, Ariel D. Procaccia, Jamie Tucker-Foltz, Manuel Wüthrich

Abstract: Platforms for online civic participation rely heavily on methods for condensing thousands of comments into a relevant handful, based on whether participants agree or disagree with them. These methods should guarantee fair representation of the participants, as their outcomes may affect the health of the conversation and inform impactful downstream decisions. To that end, we draw on the literature… ▽ More Platforms for online civic participation rely heavily on methods for condensing thousands of comments into a relevant handful, based on whether participants agree or disagree with them. These methods should guarantee fair representation of the participants, as their outcomes may affect the health of the conversation and inform impactful downstream decisions. To that end, we draw on the literature on approval-based committee elections. Our setting is novel in that the approval votes are incomplete since participants will typically not vote on all comments. We prove that this complication renders non-adaptive algorithms impractical in terms of the amount of information they must gather. Therefore, we develop an adaptive algorithm that uses information more efficiently by presenting incoming participants with statements that appear promising based on votes by previous participants. We prove that this method satisfies commonly used notions of fair representation, even when participants only vote on a small fraction of comments. Finally, an empirical evaluation using real data shows that the proposed algorithm provides representative outcomes in practice. △ Less

Submitted 21 December, 2023; v1 submitted 28 November, 2022; originally announced November 2022.

Smoothed Analysis of Social Choice, Revisited

Authors: Bailey Flanigan, Daniel Halpern, Alexandros Psomas

Abstract: A canonical problem in social choice is how to aggregate ranked votes: given $n$ voters' rankings over $m$ candidates, what voting rule $f$ should we use to aggregate these votes into a single winner? One standard method for comparing voting rules is by their satisfaction of axioms - properties that we want a "reasonable" rule to satisfy. Unfortunately, this approach leads to several impossibiliti… ▽ More A canonical problem in social choice is how to aggregate ranked votes: given $n$ voters' rankings over $m$ candidates, what voting rule $f$ should we use to aggregate these votes into a single winner? One standard method for comparing voting rules is by their satisfaction of axioms - properties that we want a "reasonable" rule to satisfy. Unfortunately, this approach leads to several impossibilities: no voting rule can simultaneously satisfy all the properties we want, at least in the worst case over all possible inputs. Motivated by this, we consider a relaxation of these worst case requirements. We do so using a "smoothed" model of social choice, where votes are perturbed with small amounts of noise. If, no matter which input profile we start with, the probability (post-noise) of an axiom being satisfied is large, we will consider the axiom as good as satisfied - called "smoothed-satisfied" - even if it may be violated in the worst case. Our model is a mild restriction of Lirong Xia's, and corresponds closely to that in Spielman and Teng's original work on smoothed analysis. Much work has been done so far in several papers by Xia on axiom satisfaction under such noise. In our paper, we aim to give a more cohesive overview on when smoothed analysis of social choice is useful. Within our model, we give simple sufficient conditions for smoothed-satisfaction or smoothed-violation of several previously-unstudied axioms and paradoxes, plus many of those studied by Xia. We then observe that, in a practically important subclass of noise models, although convergence eventually occurs, known rates may require an extremely large number of voters. Motivated by this, we prove bounds specifically within a canonical noise model from this subclass - the Mallows model. Here, we present a more nuanced picture on exactly when smoothed analysis can help. △ Less

Submitted 5 August, 2023; v1 submitted 29 June, 2022; originally announced June 2022.

Convergence of a Human-in-the-Loop Policy-Gradient Algorithm With Eligibility Trace Under Reward, Policy, and Advantage Feedback

Authors: Ishaan Shah, David Halpern, Kavosh Asadi, Michael L. Littman

Abstract: Fluid human-agent communication is essential for the future of human-in-the-loop reinforcement learning. An agent must respond appropriately to feedback from its human trainer even before they have significant experience working together. Therefore, it is important that learning agents respond well to various feedback schemes human trainers are likely to provide. This work analyzes the COnvergent… ▽ More Fluid human-agent communication is essential for the future of human-in-the-loop reinforcement learning. An agent must respond appropriately to feedback from its human trainer even before they have significant experience working together. Therefore, it is important that learning agents respond well to various feedback schemes human trainers are likely to provide. This work analyzes the COnvergent Actor-Critic by Humans (COACH) algorithm under three different types of feedback-policy feedback, reward feedback, and advantage feedback. For these three feedback types, we find that COACH can behave sub-optimally. We propose a variant of COACH, episodic COACH (E-COACH), which we prove converges for all three types. We compare our COACH variant with two other reinforcement-learning algorithms: Q-learning and TAMER. △ Less

Submitted 14 September, 2021; originally announced September 2021.

Comments: Accepted into ICML 2021 workshops Human-AI Collaboration in Sequential Decision-Making and Human in the Loop Learning

In Defense of Liquid Democracy

Authors: Daniel Halpern, Joseph Y. Halpern, Ali Jadbabaie, Elchanan Mossel, Ariel D. Procaccia, Manon Revel

Abstract: Fluid democracy is a voting paradigm that allows voters to choose between directly voting and transitively delegating their votes to other voters. While fluid democracy has been viewed as a system that can combine the best aspects of direct and representative democracy, it can also result in situations where few voters amass a large amount of influence. To analyze the impact of this shortcoming, w… ▽ More Fluid democracy is a voting paradigm that allows voters to choose between directly voting and transitively delegating their votes to other voters. While fluid democracy has been viewed as a system that can combine the best aspects of direct and representative democracy, it can also result in situations where few voters amass a large amount of influence. To analyze the impact of this shortcoming, we consider what has been called an epistemic setting, where voters decide on a binary issue for which there is a ground truth. Previous work has shown that under certain assumptions on the delegation mechanism, the concentration of power is so severe that fluid democracy is less likely to identify the ground truth than direct voting. We examine different, arguably more realistic, classes of mechanisms, and prove they behave well by ensuring that (with high probability) there is a limit on concentration of power. Our proofs demonstrate that delegations can be treated as stochastic processes and that they can be compared to well-known processes from the literature -- such as preferential attachment and multi-types branching process -- that are sufficiently bounded for our purposes. Our results suggest that the concerns raised about fluid democracy can be overcome, thereby bolstering the case for this emerging paradigm. △ Less

Submitted 29 March, 2022; v1 submitted 25 July, 2021; originally announced July 2021.

The Optimal Size of an Epistemic Congress

Authors: Manon Revel, Tao Lin, Daniel Halpern

Abstract: We analyze the optimal size of a congress in a representative democracy. We take an epistemic view where voters decide on a binary issue with one ground truth outcome, and each voter votes correctly according to their competence levels in $[0, 1]$. Assuming that we can sample the best experts to form an epistemic congress, we find that the optimal congress size should be linear in the population s… ▽ More We analyze the optimal size of a congress in a representative democracy. We take an epistemic view where voters decide on a binary issue with one ground truth outcome, and each voter votes correctly according to their competence levels in $[0, 1]$. Assuming that we can sample the best experts to form an epistemic congress, we find that the optimal congress size should be linear in the population size. This result is striking because it holds even when allowing the top representatives to be accurate with arbitrarily high probabilities. We then analyze real world data, finding that the actual sizes of congresses are much smaller than the optimal size our theoretical results suggest. We conclude by analyzing under what conditions congresses of sub-optimal sizes would still outperform direct democracy, in which all voters vote. △ Less

Submitted 2 July, 2021; originally announced July 2021.

Can Buyers Reveal for a Better Deal?

Authors: Daniel Halpern, Gregory Kehne, Jamie Tucker-Foltz

Abstract: We study market interactions in which buyers are allowed to credibly reveal partial information about their types to the seller. Previous recent work has studied the special case of one buyer and one good, showing that such communication can simultaneously improve social welfare and ex ante buyer utility. However, with multiple buyers, we find that the buyer-optimal signalling schemes from the one… ▽ More We study market interactions in which buyers are allowed to credibly reveal partial information about their types to the seller. Previous recent work has studied the special case of one buyer and one good, showing that such communication can simultaneously improve social welfare and ex ante buyer utility. However, with multiple buyers, we find that the buyer-optimal signalling schemes from the one-buyer case are actually harmful to buyer welfare. Moreover, we prove several impossibility results showing that, with either multiple i.i.d. buyers or multiple i.i.d. goods, maximizing buyer utility can be at odds with social efficiency, which is surprising in contrast with the one-buyer, one-good case. Finally, we investigate the computational tractability of implementing desirable equilibrium outcomes. We find that, even with one buyer and one good, optimizing buyer utility is generally NP-hard but tractable in a practical restricted setting. △ Less

Submitted 3 May, 2022; v1 submitted 25 June, 2021; originally announced June 2021.

Fair and Efficient Resource Allocation with Partial Information

Authors: Daniel Halpern, Nisarg Shah

Abstract: We study the fundamental problem of allocating indivisible goods to agents with additive preferences. We consider eliciting from each agent only a ranking of her $k$ most preferred goods instead of her full cardinal valuations. We characterize the value of $k$ needed to achieve envy-freeness up to one good and approximate maximin share guarantee, two widely studied fairness notions. We also analyz… ▽ More We study the fundamental problem of allocating indivisible goods to agents with additive preferences. We consider eliciting from each agent only a ranking of her $k$ most preferred goods instead of her full cardinal valuations. We characterize the value of $k$ needed to achieve envy-freeness up to one good and approximate maximin share guarantee, two widely studied fairness notions. We also analyze the multiplicative loss in social welfare incurred due to the lack of full information with and without the fairness requirements. △ Less

Submitted 24 May, 2021; v1 submitted 20 May, 2021; originally announced May 2021.

Comments: Appears in the Proceedings of IJCAI 2021

Fair Division with Binary Valuations: One Rule to Rule Them All

Authors: Daniel Halpern, Ariel D. Procaccia, Alexandros Psomas, Nisarg Shah

Abstract: We study fair allocation of indivisible goods among agents. Prior research focuses on additive agent preferences, which leads to an impossibility when seeking truthfulness, fairness, and efficiency. We show that when agents have binary additive preferences, a compelling rule -- maximum Nash welfare (MNW) -- provides all three guarantees. Specifically, we show that deterministic MNW with lexicogr… ▽ More We study fair allocation of indivisible goods among agents. Prior research focuses on additive agent preferences, which leads to an impossibility when seeking truthfulness, fairness, and efficiency. We show that when agents have binary additive preferences, a compelling rule -- maximum Nash welfare (MNW) -- provides all three guarantees. Specifically, we show that deterministic MNW with lexicographic tie-breaking is group strategyproof in addition to being envy-free up to one good and Pareto optimal. We also prove that fractional MNW -- known to be group strategyproof, envy-free, and Pareto optimal -- can be implemented as a distribution over deterministic MNW allocations, which are envy-free up to one good. Our work establishes maximum Nash welfare as the ultimate allocation rule in the realm of binary additive preferences. △ Less

Submitted 30 September, 2020; v1 submitted 12 July, 2020; originally announced July 2020.

Resolving the Optimal Metric Distortion Conjecture

Authors: Vasilis Gkatzelis, Daniel Halpern, Nisarg Shah

Abstract: We study the following metric distortion problem: there are two finite sets of points, $V$ and $C$, that lie in the same metric space, and our goal is to choose a point in $C$ whose total distance from the points in $V$ is as small as possible. However, rather than having access to the underlying distance metric, we only know, for each point in $V$, a ranking of its distances to the points in $C$.… ▽ More We study the following metric distortion problem: there are two finite sets of points, $V$ and $C$, that lie in the same metric space, and our goal is to choose a point in $C$ whose total distance from the points in $V$ is as small as possible. However, rather than having access to the underlying distance metric, we only know, for each point in $V$, a ranking of its distances to the points in $C$. We propose algorithms that choose a point in $C$ using only these rankings as input and we provide bounds on their \emph{distortion} (worst-case approximation ratio). A prominent motivation for this problem comes from voting theory, where $V$ represents a set of voters, $C$ represents a set of candidates, and the rankings correspond to ordinal preferences of the voters. A major conjecture in this framework is that the optimal deterministic algorithm has distortion $3$. We resolve this conjecture by providing a polynomial-time algorithm that achieves distortion $3$, matching a known lower bound. We do so by proving a novel lemma about matching voters to candidates, which we refer to as the \emph{ranking-matching lemma}. This lemma induces a family of novel algorithms, which may be of independent interest, and we show that a special algorithm in this family achieves distortion $3$. We also provide more refined, parameterized, bounds using the notion of $α$-decisiveness, which quantifies the extent to which a voter may prefer her top choice relative to all others. Finally, we introduce a new randomized algorithm with improved distortion compared to known results, and also provide improved lower bounds on the distortion of all deterministic and randomized algorithms. △ Less

Submitted 7 September, 2020; v1 submitted 16 April, 2020; originally announced April 2020.

Comments: An extended abstract of this paper appears in the Proceedings of FOCS 2020