Paper detail

On partisan bias in redistricting: computational complexity meets the science of gerrymandering

The topic of this paper is "gerrymandering", namely the curse of deliberate creations of district maps with highly asymmetric electoral outcomes to disenfranchise voters, and it has a long legal history. Measuring and eliminating gerrymandering has enormous implications to sustain the backbone of democratic principles of a society. Although there is no dearth of legal briefs involving gerrymandering over many years, it is only more recently that mathematicians and applied computational researchers have started to investigate this topic. However, it has received relatively little attention so far from the computational complexity researchers dealing with theoretical analysis of computational complexity issues, such as computational hardness, approximability issues, etc. There could be many reasons for this, such as descriptions of these problem non-CS non-math (often legal or political) journals that theoretical CS (TCS) people usually do not follow, or the lack of coverage of these topics in TCS publication venues. One of our modest goals in writing this article is to improve upon this situation by stimulating further interactions between the gerrymandering and TCS researchers. To this effect, our main contributions are twofold: (1) we provide formalization of several models, related concepts, and corresponding problem statements using TCS frameworks from the descriptions of these problems as available in existing non-TCS (perhaps legal) venues, and (2) we also provide computational complexity analysis of some versions of these problems, leaving other versions for future research. The goal of writing this article is not to have the final word on gerrymandering, but to introduce a series of concepts, models and problems to the TCS community and to show that science of gerrymandering involves an intriguing set of partitioning problems involving geometric and combinatorial optimization.

preprint2019arXivOpen 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.