Georgios Papasotiropoulos

Georgios Papasotiropoulos, Seyedeh Zeinab Pishbin, Oskar Skibski et al. · oxford

In participatory budgeting (PB), voters decide through voting which subset of projects to fund within a given budget. Proportionality in the context of PB is crucial to ensure equal treatment of all groups of voters. However, pure proportional rules can sometimes lead to suboptimal outcomes. We introduce the Method of Equal Shares with Bounded Overspending (BOS Equal Shares), a robust variant of Equal Shares that balances proportionality and efficiency. BOS Equal Shares addresses inefficiencies implied by strict proportionality axioms, yet the rule still provides fairness guarantees, similar to the original Method of Equal Shares. Our extensive empirical analysis on real-world PB instances shows excellent performance of BOS Equal Shares across several metrics. In the course of the analysis, we also present and examine a fractional variant of the Method of Equal Shares which allows for partial funding of projects.

Evangelos Markakis, Georgios Papasotiropoulos

In recent years, the study of various models and questions related to Liquid Democracy has been of growing interest among the community of Computational Social Choice. A concern that has been raised, is that current academic literature focuses solely on static inputs, concealing a key characteristic of Liquid Democracy: the right for a voter to change her mind as time goes by, regarding her options of whether to vote herself or delegate her vote to other participants, till the final voting deadline. In real life, a period of extended deliberation preceding the election-day motivates voters to adapt their behaviour over time, either based on observations of the remaining electorate or on information acquired for the topic at hand. By adding a temporal dimension to Liquid Democracy, such adaptations can increase the number of possible delegation paths and reduce the loss of votes due to delegation cycles or delegating paths towards abstaining agents, ultimately enhancing participation. Our work takes a first step to integrate a time horizon into decision-making problems in Liquid Democracy systems. Our approach, via a computational complexity analysis, exploits concepts and tools from temporal graph theory which turn out to be convenient for our framework.

Shiri Alouf-Heffetz, Łukasz Janeczko, Grzegorz Lisowski et al.

We examine an approval-based model of Liquid Democracy with a budget constraint on voting and delegating costs, aiming to centrally select casting voters ensuring complete representation of the electorate. From a computational complexity perspective, we focus on minimizing overall costs, maintaining short delegation paths, and preventing excessive concentration of voting power. Furthermore, we explore computational aspects of strategic control, specifically, whether external agents can change election components to influence the voting power of certain voters.

Georgios Papasotiropoulos, Oskar Skibski, Piotr Skowron et al. · oxford

We address the problem of selecting $k$ representative nodes from a network, aiming to achieve two objectives: identifying the most influential nodes and ensuring the selection proportionally reflects the network's diversity. We propose two approaches to accomplish this, analyze them theoretically, and demonstrate their effectiveness through a series of experiments.

Georgios Papasotiropoulos, Zein Pishbin

This paper bridges two perspectives: it studies the multi-secretary problem through the fairness lens of social choice, and examines multi-winner elections from the viewpoint of online decision making. After identifying the limitations of the prominent proportionality notion of Extended Justified Representation (EJR) in the online domain, the work proposes a set of mechanisms that merge techniques from online algorithms with rules from social choice -- such as the Method of Equal Shares and the Nash Rule -- and supports them through both theoretical analysis and extensive experimental evaluation.

Sonja Kraiczy, Georgios Papasotiropoulos, Grzegorz Pierczyński et al.

Consider the decision-making setting where agents elect a panel by expressing both positive and negative preferences. Prominently, in constitutional AI, citizens democratically select a slate of ethical preferences on which a foundation model is to be trained. There, in practice, agents may both approve and disapprove of different ethical principles. Proportionality has been well-studied in computational social choice for approval ballots, but its meaning remains unclear when negative sentiments are also considered. In this work, we propose two conceptually distinct approaches to interpret proportionality in the presence of up and down votes. The first approach treats the satisfaction from electing candidates and the impact of vetoing them as comparable, leading to combined proportionality guarantees. The second approach considers veto power separately, introducing guarantees distinct from traditional proportionality. We formalize axioms for each perspective and examine their satisfiability by suitable adaptations of Phragmén's rule, Proportional Approval Voting rule and the Method of Equal Shares.

Evangelos Markakis, Georgios Papasotiropoulos

We focus on a generalization of the classic Minisum approval voting rule, introduced by Barrot and Lang (2016), and referred to as Conditional Minisum (CMS), for multi-issue elections with preferential dependencies. Under this rule, voters are allowed to declare dependencies between different issues, but the price we have to pay for this higher level of expressiveness is that we end up with a computationally hard rule. Motivated by this, we first focus on finding special cases that admit efficient algorithms for CMS. Our main result in this direction is that we identify the condition of bounded treewidth (of an appropriate graph, emerging from the provided ballots) as the necessary and sufficient condition for exact polynomial algorithms, under common complexity assumptions. We then move to the design of approximation algorithms. For the (still hard) case of binary issues, we identify natural restrictions on the voters' ballots, under which we provide the first multiplicative approximation algorithms for the problem. The restrictions involve upper bounds on the number of dependencies an issue can have on the others and on the number of alternatives per issue that a voter can approve. Finally, we also investigate the complexity of problems related to the strategic control of conditional approval elections by adding or deleting either voters or alternatives and we show that in most variants of these problems, CMS is computationally resistant against control. Overall, we conclude that CMS can be viewed as a solution that achieves a satisfactory tradeoff between expressiveness and computational efficiency, when we have a limited number of dependencies among issues, while at the same time exhibiting sufficient resistance to control.