Paper detail

Fair Committee Selection under Ordinal Preferences and Limited Cardinal Information

We study the problem of fair $k$-committee selection under an egalitarian objective. Given $n$ agents partitioned into $m$ groups (\eg, demographic quotas), the goal is to aggregate their preferences to form a committee of size $k$ that guarantees minimum representation from each group while minimizing the maximum \emph{cost} incurred by any agent. We model this setting as the ordinal fair $k$-center problem, where agents are embedded in an unknown metric space, and each agent reports a complete preference ranking (i.e., ordinal information) over all agents, consistent with the underlying distance metric (i.e., cardinal information). The cost incurred by an agent with respect to a committee is defined as its distance to the closest committee member. The quality of an algorithm is evaluated using the notion of distortion, which measures the worst-case ratio between the cost of the committee produced by the algorithm and the cost of an optimal committee, when given complete access to the underlying metric space. When cardinal information is not available, no constant distortion is possible for the ordinal $k$-center problem, even without fairness constraints, when $k\geq 3$ [Burkhardt et.al., AAAI'24]. To overcome this hardness, we allow limited access to cardinal information by querying the metric space. In this setting, our main contribution is a factor-$5$ distortion algorithm that requires only $O(k \log^2 k)$ queries. Along the way, we present an improved factor-$3$ distortion algorithm using $O(k^2)$ queries.

preprint2025arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.