Distributed Agreement in the Arrovian Framework
0
🏅
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- The paper explores distributed agreement in the Arrovian framework, which is a mathematical model for collective decision-making.
- It investigates how groups can reach consensus when individual preferences are aggregated.
- The research considers the implications of Arrow's Impossibility Theorem, which places restrictions on the types of voting systems that can satisfy certain fairness criteria.
Plain English Explanation
The paper looks at how groups can come to an agreement when they need to make a collective decision. This is a challenging problem because individual people often have different preferences, and there are certain fairness criteria that voting systems need to satisfy.
The researchers use the Arrovian framework, which is a mathematical way of modeling how individual preferences are combined to reach a group decision. They investigate how groups can reach a distributed agreement - that is, how the group can come to a consensus without a central authority coordinating the process.
The key insight is that there are tradeoffs between the fairness criteria that voting systems can satisfy, as shown by Arrow's Impossibility Theorem. The researchers explore how groups can navigate these tradeoffs to reach an agreement that is as fair as possible.
Technical Explanation
The paper investigates distributed agreement in the Arrovian framework, which provides a formal model for collective decision-making. In this framework, a group of individuals with distinct preferences must come to a consensus on a collective decision.
The researchers consider the implications of Arrow's Impossibility Theorem, which states that there is no voting system that can simultaneously satisfy certain desirable fairness criteria. They explore how groups can reach distributed agreement - a consensus reached through a decentralized process without a central authority.
The key technical contributions include:
- Formalizing the distributed agreement problem in the Arrovian framework
- Identifying the tradeoffs between fairness criteria in the distributed setting
- Proposing and analyzing distributed agreement protocols that navigate these tradeoffs
The researchers develop theoretical models and analysis techniques to understand the fundamental limits and possibilities for distributed agreement under the Arrovian constraints.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a rigorous mathematical treatment of the distributed agreement problem, building on the well-established Arrovian framework for collective decision-making. By considering the implications of Arrow's Impossibility Theorem in the distributed setting, the researchers uncover important tradeoffs that groups must navigate when trying to reach consensus.
One limitation of the work is that it focuses primarily on the theoretical analysis, without extensive empirical validation of the proposed protocols. Real-world group decision-making involves many additional complexities, such as strategic behavior, limited information, and network effects, that are not fully captured in the Arrovian model.
Additionally, the paper does not deeply explore the practical implementation challenges of deploying distributed agreement protocols in realistic applications. Further research is needed to understand how these theoretical insights translate to actual decision-making processes in organizations, governments, and other collective bodies.
Conclusion
This paper makes a significant contribution to the theoretical understanding of distributed agreement in the Arrovian framework. By rigorously analyzing the tradeoffs between fairness criteria, the researchers provide a foundation for developing more sophisticated protocols and systems to support collective decision-making.
While the work is primarily theoretical, it lays the groundwork for further research into the practical application of these ideas. Bridging the gap between the mathematical model and real-world decision-making processes will be an important next step in advancing our understanding of how groups can reach fair and efficient agreements in a distributed manner.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🏅
0
Distributed Agreement in the Arrovian Framework
Kenan Wood, Hammurabi Mendes, Jonad Pulaj
Preference aggregation is a fundamental problem in voting theory, in which public input rankings of a set of alternatives (called preferences) must be aggregated into a single preference that satisfies certain soundness properties. The celebrated Arrow Impossibility Theorem is equivalent to a distributed task in a synchronous fault-free system that satisfies properties such as respecting unanimous preferences, maintaining independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA), and non-dictatorship, along with consensus since only one preference can be decided. In this work, we study a weaker distributed task in which crash faults are introduced, IIA is not required, and the consensus property is relaxed to either $k$-set agreement or $epsilon$-approximate agreement using any metric on the set of preferences. In particular, we prove several novel impossibility results for both of these tasks in both synchronous and asynchronous distributed systems. We additionally show that the impossibility for our $epsilon$-approximate agreement task using the Kendall tau or Spearman footrule metrics holds under extremely weak assumptions.
Read more9/10/2024
📈
0
Escaping Arrow's Theorem: The Advantage-Standard Model
Wesley H. Holliday, Mikayla Kelley
There is an extensive literature in social choice theory studying the consequences of weakening the assumptions of Arrow's Impossibility Theorem. Much of this literature suggests that there is no escape from Arrow-style impossibility theorems, while remaining in an ordinal preference setting, unless one drastically violates the Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives (IIA). In this paper, we present a more positive outlook. We propose a model of comparing candidates in elections, which we call the Advantage-Standard (AS) model. The requirement that a collective choice rule (CCR) be representable by the AS model captures a key insight of IIA but is weaker than IIA; yet it is stronger than what is known in the literature as weak IIA (two profiles alike on $x,y$ cannot have opposite strict social preferences on $x$ and $y$). In addition to motivating violations of IIA, the AS model makes intelligible violations of another Arrovian assumption: the negative transitivity of the strict social preference relation $P$. While previous literature shows that only weakening IIA to weak IIA or only weakening negative transitivity of $P$ to acyclicity still leads to impossibility theorems, we show that jointly weakening IIA to AS representability and weakening negative transitivity of $P$ leads to no such impossibility theorems. Indeed, we show that several appealing CCRs are AS representable, including even transitive CCRs.
Read more7/2/2024
🔍
0
Asynchronous Approximate Agreement with Quadratic Communication
Mose Mizrahi Erbes, Roger Wattenhofer
We consider an asynchronous network of $n$ message-sending parties, up to $t$ of which are byzantine. We study approximate agreement, where the parties obtain approximately equal outputs in the convex hull of their inputs. The seminal protocol of Abraham, Amit and Dolev [OPODIS '04] achieves approximate agreement in $mathbb{R}$ with the optimal resilience $t < frac{n}{3}$ by making each party reliably broadcast its input. This takes $Omega(n^2)$ messages per reliable broadcast, or $Omega(n^3)$ messages in total. In this work, we present optimally resilient asynchronous approximate agreement protocols which forgo reliable broadcast and thus require communication proportional to $n^2$ instead of $n^3$. First, we achieve $omega$-dimensional barycentric agreement with $mathcal{O}(omega n^2)$ small messages. Then, we achieve edge agreement in a tree of diameter $D$ with $lceil log_2 D rceil$ iterations of a multivalued graded consensus variant for which we design an efficient protocol. This results in a $mathcal{O}(logfrac{1}{varepsilon})$-round protocol for $varepsilon$-agreement in $[0, 1]$ with $mathcal{O}(n^2logfrac{1}{varepsilon})$ messages and $mathcal{O}(n^2logfrac{1}{varepsilon}loglogfrac{1}{varepsilon})$ bits of communication, improving over the state of the art which matches this complexity only when the inputs are all either $0$ or $1$. Finally, we extend our edge agreement protocol to achieve edge agreement in $mathbb{Z}$ and thus $varepsilon$-agreement in $mathbb{R}$ with quadratic communication, in $mathcal{O}(logfrac{M}{varepsilon})$ rounds where $M$ is the maximum honest input magnitude.
Read more8/13/2024
0
DeepVoting: Learning Voting Rules with Tailored Embeddings
Leonardo Matone, Ben Abramowitz, Nicholas Mattei, Avinash Balakrishnan
Aggregating the preferences of multiple agents into a collective decision is a common step in many important problems across areas of computer science including information retrieval, reinforcement learning, and recommender systems. As Social Choice Theory has shown, the problem of designing algorithms for aggregation rules with specific properties (axioms) can be difficult, or provably impossible in some cases. Instead of designing algorithms by hand, one can learn aggregation rules, particularly voting rules, from data. However, the prior work in this area has required extremely large models, or been limited by the choice of preference representation, i.e., embedding. We recast the problem of designing a good voting rule into one of learning probabilistic versions of voting rules that output distributions over a set of candidates. Specifically, we use neural networks to learn probabilistic social choice functions from the literature. We show that embeddings of preference profiles derived from the social choice literature allows us to learn existing voting rules more efficiently and scale to larger populations of voters more easily than other work if the embedding is tailored to the learning objective. Moreover, we show that rules learned using embeddings can be tweaked to create novel voting rules with improved axiomatic properties. Namely, we show that existing voting rules require only minor modification to combat a probabilistic version of the No Show Paradox.
Read more8/27/2024