A Quantitative Analysis of Multi-Winner Rules

Authors: Martin Lackner, Piotr Skowron

IJCAI 2019 | Conference PDF | Archive PDF | Plain Text | LLM Run Details

Reproducibility Variable Result LLM Response
Research Type Experimental With both theoretical and experimental methods we classify multi-winner rules in terms of their quantitative alignment with these two opposing objectives. In Section 4, we complement the worst-case analysis from Section 3 with an experimental study yielding approximation ratios for actual data sets.
Researcher Affiliation Academia TU Wien, Vienna, Austria 2University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Pseudocode No The paper describes methods in text and uses mathematical formulas, but does not include structured pseudocode or algorithm blocks.
Open Source Code No The paper does not contain an explicit statement about releasing source code for the described methodology or a direct link to a code repository.
Open Datasets Yes We have used two data sets: profiles obtained from preflib. org [Mattei and Walsh, 2013] and profiles generated via a uniform distribution.
Dataset Splits No The paper describes characteristics of the datasets and the parameters used for experiments (e.g., committee size k), but does not specify training, validation, or test dataset splits.
Hardware Specification No The paper does not provide any specific hardware details used for running its experiments.
Software Dependencies No The paper does not list specific software dependencies with version numbers.
Experiment Setup Yes We restricted our attention to profiles where both the AV-ratio of CC and the CC-ratio of AV is at most 0.9. This excludes profiles where an (almost) perfect compromise between AV and CC exists. The uniform dataset consists of 500 profiles with 20 candidates and 50 voters, each. Voters approval sets are of size 2 5 (chosen uniformly at random); the approval sets of a given size are also chosen uniformly at random. Experiments for the uniform dataset use a committee size of k = 5.