Budgeted Social Choice: From Consensus to Personalized Decision Making
نویسندگان
چکیده
We develop a general framework for social choice problems in which a limited number of alternatives can be recommended to an agent population. In our budgeted social choice model, this limit is determined by a budget, capturing problems that arise naturally in a variety of contexts, and spanning the continuum from pure consensus decision making (i.e., standard social choice) to fully personalized recommendation. Our approach applies a form of segmentation to social choice problems— requiring the selection of diverse options tailored to different agent types—and generalizes certain multi-winner election schemes. We show that standard rank aggregation methods perform poorly, and that optimization in our model is NP-complete; but we develop fast greedy algorithms with some theoretical guarantees. Experiments on real-world datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of our algorithms.
منابع مشابه
Budgeted Social Choice: A Framework for Multiple Recommendations in Consensus Decision Making
We develop a new framework for social choice problems, budgeted social choice, in which a limited number of alternatives can be recommended/prescribed to a population of agents. This limit is determined by some form of budget. Such problems naturally arise in a variety of contexts. Our model is general, spanning the continuum from pure consensus decisions (i.e., standard social choice) to fully...
متن کاملWhen authorities' commands backfire: attributions about consensus and effects on deviant decision making.
The perception of consensus typically produces conformity, but specific attributional circumstances may produce deviance instead. Ironically, the command of an authority figure may create one such circumstance. Participants were presented with scenarios in which they had to make a choice between 2 options. Prior to their decision, they observed others all making a single choice. In some conditi...
متن کاملEnabling rational democratic decision-making with collective belief models and game theoretic analysis
We introduce a new approach to aggregating the beliefs and preferences of many individuals to form models for democratic decision-making. Traditional social choice functions used to aggregate beliefs and preferences attempt to find a single consensus model, but produce inconsistent results when a stalemate between opposing opinions occurs. Our approach combines the probabilistic beliefs of many...
متن کاملRational Choice Theory: A Cultural Reconsideration
Economists have heralded the formulation of the expected utility theorem as a universal method of choice under uncertainty. In their seminal paper, Stigler and Becker (Stigler & Becker, 1977) declared that “human behavior can be explained by a generalized calculus of utility-maximizing behavior” (p.76). The universality of the rational choice theory has been widely criticized by psychologists, ...
متن کاملBoth information and social cohesion determine collective decisions in animal groups.
During consensus decision making, individuals in groups balance personal information (based on their own past experiences) with social information (based on the behavior of other individuals), allowing the group to reach a single collective choice. Previous studies of consensus decision making processes have focused on the informational aspects of behavioral choice, assuming that individuals ma...
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 2011