Weighted Scoring Committees

Weighted committees allow shareholders, party leaders, etc. to wield different numbers of votes or voting weights as they decide between multiple candidates by a given social choice method. We consider committees that apply scoring methods such as plurality, Borda, or antiplurality rule. Many different weights induce the same mapping from committee members’ preferences to winning candidates. The numbers of respective weight equivalence classes and hence of structurally distinct plurality committees, Borda commitees, etc. differ widely. There are 6, 51, and 5 plurality, Borda, and antiplurality committees, respectively, if three players choose between three candidates and up to 163 (229) committees for scoring rules in between plurality and Borda (Borda and antiplurality). A key implication is that plurality, Borda, and antiplurality rule are much less sensitive to weight changes than other scoring rules. We illustrate the geometry of weight equivalence classes, with a map of all Borda classes, and identify minimal integer representations.

An ensemble deep learning method with optimized weights for drone-based water rescue and surveillance

Today’s deep learning architectures, if trained with proper dataset, can be used for object detection in marine search and rescue operations. In this paper a dataset for maritime search and rescue purposes is proposed. It contains aerial-drone videos with 40,000 hand-annotated persons and objects floating in the water, many of small size, which makes them difficult to detect. The second contribution is our proposed object detection method. It is an ensemble composed of a number of the deep convolutional neural networks, orchestrated by the fusion module with the nonlinearly optimized voting weights. The method achieves over 82% of average precision on the new aerial-drone floating objects dataset and outperforms each of the state-of-the-art deep neural networks, such as YOLOv3, -v4, Faster R-CNN, RetinaNet, and SSD300. The dataset is publicly available from the Internet.

Weighted voting procedure having a unique blocker

The Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council of India has a non-conventional weighted voting procedure having a primary player who is a blocker and a set of secondary players. The voting weights are not fixed and are determined based on the subset of players which participate in the voting. We introduce the notion of voting schema to formally model such a voting procedure. Individual voting games arise from a voting schema depending on the subset of secondary players who participate in the voting. We make a detailed formal study of the trade-off between the minimal sizes of winning and blocking coalitions in the voting games that can arise from a voting schema. Finally, the GST voting procedure is assessed using the theoretical results leading to suggestions for improvement.

The All Affected Principle, and the weighting of votes

In this article we defend the view that, on the All Affected Principle of voting rights, the weight of a person’s vote on a decision should be determined by and only by the degree to which that decision affects her interests, independently of her voting weights on other decisions. Further, we consider two recent alternative proposals for how the All Affected Principle should weight votes, and give reasons for rejecting both.

Differential Voting Weights and Relational Egalitarianism

Two prominent relational egalitarians, Elizabeth Anderson and Niko Kolodny, object to giving people in a democratic community differential voting weights on the grounds that doing so would lead to unequal relations between them. Their claim is that deviating from a “one-person, one-vote” scheme is incompatible with realizing relational egalitarian justice. In this article, I argue that they are wrong. I do so by showing that people can relate as moral, epistemic, social, and empirical equals in a scheme with differential voting weights. I end the article by showing that from the perspective of relational egalitarianism, it is sometimes true that differential voting weights are more just than equal voting weights.

Legislative and Multilateral Bargaining

This review of the theoretical literature on legislative and multilateral bargaining begins with presentation of the seminal Baron-Ferejohn model. The review then encompasses the extensions to bargaining among asymmetric players in terms of bargaining power, voting weights, and time and risk preferences; spatial bargaining; bargaining over a stochastic surplus; bargaining over public goods; legislative bargaining with alternative bargaining protocols in which players make demands, compete for recognition, or make counterproposals; and legislative bargaining with cheap talk communication.