Felipe Garrido-Lucero

Felipe Garrido-Lucero, Benjamin Heymann, Maxime Vono et al.

We consider the dataset valuation problem, that is, the problem of quantifying the incremental gain, to some relevant pre-defined utility of a machine learning task, of aggregating an individual dataset to others. The Shapley value is a natural tool to perform dataset valuation due to its formal axiomatic justification, which can be combined with Monte Carlo integration to overcome the computational tractability challenges. Such generic approximation methods, however, remain expensive in some cases. In this paper, we exploit the knowledge about the structure of the dataset valuation problem to devise more efficient Shapley value estimators. We propose a novel approximation, referred to as discrete uniform Shapley, which is expressed as an expectation under a discrete uniform distribution with support of reasonable size. We justify the relevancy of the proposed framework via asymptotic and non-asymptotic theoretical guarantees and illustrate its benefits via an extensive set of numerical experiments.

Mohamed Ouaguenouni, Felipe Garrido-Lucero, Umberto Grandi et al.

We analyze the structure of the disagreement among a population of voters over a set of alternatives. Surveys typically ask either for pairwise comparisons, simple and intuitive for participants, or full rankings over alternatives, eliciting the entire voters' preferences. Building on the observation that pairwise comparisons cannot distinguish structural disagreement from noise, we propose a stratified framework to identify the minimal aggregated preference information needed to compute a number of disagreement measures from the literature. Specifically, we introduce the plurality matrix, a generalization of pairwise comparisons that records, for every subset $S$ of alternatives, the probability that each $a \in S$ ranks first in $S$. We define the level of a disagreement measure as the smallest subset size needed to express it, showing that many existing notions, including rank-variance and divisiveness, sit at level $3$, proving that pairwise comparisons are not enough. In addition, we demonstrate the interest of going beyond level $3$ both theoretically and experimentally. To make these results actionable, we design two elicitation protocols to estimate the plurality matrix, exploring the trade-off between the number of required participants and the cognitive load requested to each of them.

Emile Martinez, Felipe Garrido-Lucero, Umberto Grandi et al.

We introduce the \textit{prophet inequality with uncertain acceptance} model, in which a decision maker sequentially observes a sequence of independent options, each characterized by a value $x_i$ and an acceptance probability $p_i$, both sampled from a known joint distribution. At time $i$, the decision maker observes the value $x_i$ and must irrevocably and immediately decide whether to attempt to select it or to continue to the next time step. If the option is selected, the process terminates with probability $p_i$ and the decision maker obtains $x_i$; otherwise, she continues searching. In this setting, two natural benchmarks arise: the \textit{value-aware decision-maker}, who knows all value realizations in advance but not the acceptance outcomes, and the \textit{full-knowledge prophet}, who knows all realizations beforehand and can choose the best option among those that will be accepted. We characterize the worst-case competitive ratios between our defined agents and show that all these values equal $1/2$. In addition, we provide sufficient conditions under which the value-aware decision-maker surpasses the $1/2$-barrier against the more informed prophet. This demonstrates the (crucial) interest for the decision maker to improve her knowledge over the values rather than over the acceptances, and is obtained via a more general result that reduces the value-aware decision-maker's problem to a classical prophet inequality with scaled Bernoulli distributions, followed by a sequence of transformations that further reduce the problem to a unique optimization problem.

Juan Zambrano, Clément Contet, Jairo Gudiño et al.

Participatory Budgeting (PB) empowers citizens to propose and vote on public investment projects. Yet, despite its democratic potential, PB initiatives often suffer from low participation rates, limiting their visibility and perceived legitimacy. In this work, we aim to strengthen PB elections in two key ways: by supporting project proposers in crafting better proposals, and by helping PB organizers manage large volumes of submissions in a transparent manner. We propose a privacy-preserving approach to predict which PB proposals are likely to be funded, using only their textual descriptions and anonymous historical voting records -- without relying on voter demographics or personally identifiable information. We evaluate the performance of GPT 4 Turbo in forecasting proposal outcomes across varying contextual scenarios, observing that the LLM's prior knowledge needs to be complemented by past voting data to obtain predictions reflecting real-world PB voting behavior. Our findings highlight the potential of AI-driven tools to support PB processes by improving transparency, planning efficiency, and civic engagement.