A Statistical Decision-Theoretic Framework for Social Choice
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this paper, we take a statistical decision-theoretic viewpoint on social choice, putting a focus on the decision to be made on behalf of a system of agents. In our framework, we are given a statistical ranking model, a decision space, and a loss function defined on (parameter, decision) pairs, and formulate social choice mechanisms as decision rules that minimize expected loss. This suggests a general framework for the design and analysis of new social choice mechanisms. We compare Bayesian estimators, which minimize Bayesian expected loss, for the Mallows model and the Condorcet model respectively, and the Kemeny rule. We consider various normative properties, in addition to computational complexity and asymptotic behavior. In particular, we show that the Bayesian estimator for the Condorcet model satisfies some desired properties such as anonymity, neutrality, and monotonicity, can be computed in polynomial time, and is asymptotically different from the other two rules when the data are generated from the Condorcet model for some ground truth parameter.
منابع مشابه
The Utility of Reliability and Survival
Reliability (survival analysis, to biostatisticians) is a key ingredient for making decisions that mitigate the risk of failure. The other key ingredient is utility. A decision theoretic framework harnesses the two, but to invoke this framework we must distinguish between chance and probability. We describe a functional form for the utility of chance that incorporates all dispositions to risk, ...
متن کاملExploring foraging decisions in a social primate using discrete-choice models.
There is a growing appreciation of the multiple social and nonsocial factors influencing the foraging behavior of social animals but little understanding of how these factors depend on habitat characteristics or individual traits. This partly reflects the difficulties inherent in using conventional statistical techniques to analyze multifactor, multicontext foraging decisions. Discrete-choice m...
متن کاملA Decision-Theoretic Approach to Data Disclosure Problems
This paper presents a decision-theoretic approach to data disclosure problems. The approach is innovative because (i) it offers a theoretical framework to develop optimality criteria for the choice of the best form of data release, (ii) it recognizes the different perspectives of the statistical agency and of the users of the data in assessing the extent of disclosure and the quality of the use...
متن کاملDivision of the Humanities and Social Sciences California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California 91125 Stable Aggregation of Preferences
We arrive at new conclusions for social choice theory by considering the process in which we refine decision–theoretic models and account for previously irrelevant parameters of a decision situation (cf. Savage’s ‘small worlds’). Suppose that, for each individual, we consider a coarse–grained and a fine–grained decision–theoretic model, both of which are consistent with each other in a sense to...
متن کاملRationalizing Distance Rationalizability
Distance rationalizability is an intuitive paradigm for developing and studying voting rules: given a notion of consensus and a distance function on preference profiles, a rationalizable voting rule selects an alternative that is closest to being a consensus winner. Despite its appeal, distance rationalizability faces the challenge of connecting the chosen distance measure and consensus notion ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2014