Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rey, Simon, Endriss, Ulle
Format: Preprint
Published: 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.10940
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866913491156205568
author Rey, Simon
Endriss, Ulle
author_facet Rey, Simon
Endriss, Ulle
contents We initiate the study of voting rules for participatory budgeting using the so-called epistemic approach, where one interprets votes as noisy reflections of some ground truth regarding the objectively best set of projects to fund. Using this approach, we first show that both the most studied rules in the literature and the most widely used rule in practice cannot be justified on epistemic grounds: they cannot be interpreted as maximum likelihood estimators, whatever assumptions we make about the accuracy of voters. Focusing then on welfare-maximising rules, we obtain both positive and negative results regarding epistemic guarantees.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2304_10940
institution arXiv
publishDate 2023
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Epistemic Selection of Costly Alternatives: The Case of Participatory Budgeting
Rey, Simon
Endriss, Ulle
Computer Science and Game Theory
We initiate the study of voting rules for participatory budgeting using the so-called epistemic approach, where one interprets votes as noisy reflections of some ground truth regarding the objectively best set of projects to fund. Using this approach, we first show that both the most studied rules in the literature and the most widely used rule in practice cannot be justified on epistemic grounds: they cannot be interpreted as maximum likelihood estimators, whatever assumptions we make about the accuracy of voters. Focusing then on welfare-maximising rules, we obtain both positive and negative results regarding epistemic guarantees.
title Epistemic Selection of Costly Alternatives: The Case of Participatory Budgeting
topic Computer Science and Game Theory
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.10940