Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Daniel Halpern

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

13 papers
1 author row

Possible papers

13

AAAI Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Federated Assemblies

  • Daniel Halpern
  • Ariel D. Procaccia
  • Ehud Shapiro
  • Nimrod Talmon

A *citizens' assembly* is a group of people who are randomly selected to represent a larger population in a deliberation. While this approach has successfully strengthened democracy, it has certain limitations that suggest the need for assemblies to form and associate more organically. In response, we propose *federated assemblies*, where assemblies are interconnected, and each parent assembly is selected from members of its child assemblies. The main technical challenge is to develop random selection algorithms that meet new representation constraints inherent in this hierarchical structure. We design and analyze several algorithms that provide different representation guarantees under various assumptions on the structure of the underlying graph.

NeurIPS Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Pairwise Calibrated Rewards for Pluralistic Alignment

  • Daniel Halpern
  • Evi Micha
  • Ariel Procaccia
  • Itai Shapira

Current alignment pipelines presume a single, universal notion of desirable behavior. However, human preferences often diverge across users, contexts, and cultures. As a result, disagreement collapses into the majority signal and minority perspectives are discounted. To address this, we propose reflecting diverse human preferences through a distribution over multiple reward functions, each inducing a distinct aligned policy. The distribution is learned directly from pairwise preference without annotator identifiers or predefined groups. Instead, annotator disagreements are treated as informative soft labels. Our central criterion is \emph{pairwise calibration}: for every pair of candidate responses, the proportion of reward functions preferring one response matches the fraction of annotators with that preference. We prove that even a small outlier-free ensemble can accurately represent diverse preference distributions. Empirically, we introduce and validate a practical training heuristic to learn such ensembles, and demonstrate its effectiveness through improved calibration, implying a more faithful representation of pluralistic values.

IJCAI Conference 2025 Conference Paper

The Proportional Veto Principle for Approval Ballots

  • Daniel Halpern
  • Ariel D. Procaccia
  • Warut Suksompong

The proportional veto principle, which captures the idea that a candidate vetoed by a large group of voters should not be chosen, has been studied for ranked ballots in single-winner voting. We introduce a version of this principle for approval ballots, which we call flexible-voter representation (FVR). We show that while the approval voting rule and other natural scoring rules provide the optimal FVR guarantee only for some flexibility threshold, there exists a scoring rule that is FVR-optimal for all thresholds simultaneously. We also extend our results to multi-winner voting.

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Axioms for AI Alignment from Human Feedback

  • Luise Ge
  • Daniel Halpern
  • Evi Micha
  • Ariel D. Procaccia
  • Itai Shapira
  • Yevgeniy Vorobeychik
  • Junlin Wu

In the context of reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), the reward function is generally derived from maximum likelihood estimation of a random utility model based on pairwise comparisons made by humans. The problem of learning a reward function is one of preference aggregation that, we argue, largely falls within the scope of social choice theory. From this perspective, we can evaluate different aggregation methods via established axioms, examining whether these methods meet or fail well-known standards. We demonstrate that both the Bradley-Terry-Luce Model and its broad generalizations fail to meet basic axioms. In response, we develop novel rules for learning reward functions with strong axiomatic guarantees. A key innovation from the standpoint of social choice is that our problem has a linear structure, which greatly restricts the space of feasible rules and leads to a new paradigm that we call linear social choice.

IJCAI Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Metric Distortion with Elicited Pairwise Comparisons

  • Soroush Ebadian
  • Daniel Halpern
  • Evi Micha

In many social choice applications, information about individuals' preferences can only be elicited using a limited number of pairwise comparisons. In these cases, the task is twofold: we must first choose the queries, and then second, we must aggregate the responses to choose an outcome. We study the problem of designing algorithms for this setting. To compare the effectiveness of different outcomes, we use the metric distortion framework. In addition, we consider various constraints on the query algorithms, namely, placing restrictions on how the choice of the next query may depend on previous answers. Our main contributions are nearly optimal algorithms for all settings considered.

AAAI Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Representation with Incomplete Votes

  • Daniel Halpern
  • Gregory Kehne
  • Ariel D. Procaccia
  • Jamie Tucker-Foltz
  • Manuel Wüthrich

Platforms for online civic participation rely heavily on methods for condensing thousands of comments into a relevant handful, based on whether participants agree or disagree with them. These methods should guarantee fair representation of the participants, as their outcomes may affect the health of the conversation and inform impactful downstream decisions. To that end, we draw on the literature on approval-based committee elections. Our setting is novel in that the approval votes are incomplete since participants will typically not vote on all comments. We prove that this complication renders non-adaptive algorithms impractical in terms of the amount of information they must gather. Therefore, we develop an adaptive algorithm that uses information more efficiently by presenting incoming participants with statements that appear promising based on votes by previous participants. We prove that this method satisfies commonly used notions of fair representation, even when participants only vote on a small fraction of comments. Finally, an empirical evaluation using real data shows that the proposed algorithm provides representative outcomes in practice.

NeurIPS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Strategyproof Voting under Correlated Beliefs

  • Daniel Halpern
  • Rachel Li
  • Ariel D. Procaccia

In voting theory, when voters have ranked preferences over candidates, the celebrated Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem essentially rules out the existence of reasonable strategyproof methods for picking a winner. What if we weaken strategyproofness to only hold for Bayesian voters with beliefs over others' preferences? When voters believe other participants' rankings are drawn independently from a fixed distribution, the impossibility persists. However, it is quite reasonable for a voter to believe that other votes are correlated, either to each other or to their own ranking. We consider such beliefs induced by classic probabilistic models in social choice such as the Mallows, Placket-Luce, and Thurstone-Mosteller models. We single out the plurality rule (choosing the candidate ranked first most often) as a particularly promising choice as it is strategyproof for a large class of beliefs containing the specific ones we introduce. Further, we show that plurality is unique among positional scoring rules in having this property: no other scoring rule is strategyproof for beliefs induced by the Mallows model when there are a sufficient number of voters. Finally, we give examples of prominent non-scoring voting rules failing to be strategyproof on beliefs in this class, further bolstering the case for plurality.

IJCAI Conference 2022 Conference Paper

Can Buyers Reveal for a Better Deal?

  • Daniel Halpern
  • Gregory Kehne
  • Jamie Tucker-Foltz

We study market interactions in which buyers are allowed to credibly reveal partial information about their types to the seller. Previous recent work has studied the special case of one buyer and one good, showing that such communication can simultaneously improve social welfare and ex ante buyer utility. However, with multiple buyers, we find that the buyer-optimal signalling schemes from the one-buyer case are actually harmful to buyer welfare. Moreover, we prove several impossibility results showing that, with either multiple i. i. d. buyers or multiple i. i. d. goods, maximizing buyer utility can be at odds with social efficiency, which is surprising in contrast with the one-buyer, one-good case. Finally, we investigate the computational tractability of implementing desirable equilibrium outcomes. We find that, even with one buyer and one good, optimizing buyer utility is generally NP-hard but tractable in a practical restricted setting.

IJCAI Conference 2022 Conference Paper

Distortion in Voting with Top-t Preferences

  • Allan Borodin
  • Daniel Halpern
  • Mohamad Latifian
  • Nisarg Shah

A fundamental question in social choice and multi-agent systems is aggregating ordinal preferences expressed by agents into a measurably prudent collective choice. A promising line of recent work views ordinal preferences as a proxy for underlying cardinal preferences. It aims to optimize distortion, the worst-case approximation ratio of the (utilitarian) social welfare. When agents rank the set of alternatives, prior work identifies near-optimal voting rules for selecting one or more alternatives. However, ranking all the alternatives is prohibitive when there are many alternatives. In this work, we consider the setting where each agent ranks only her t favorite alternatives and identify almost tight bounds on the best possible distortion when selecting a single alternative or a committee of alternatives of a given size k. Our results also extend to approximating higher moments of social welfare. Along the way, we close a gap left open in prior work by identifying asymptotically tight distortion bounds for committee selection given full rankings.

NeurIPS Conference 2022 Conference Paper

Dynamic Fair Division with Partial Information

  • Gerdus Benade
  • Daniel Halpern
  • Alexandros Psomas

We consider the fundamental problem of fairly and efficiently allocating $T$ indivisible items among $n$ agents with additive preferences. The items become available over a sequence of rounds, and every item must be allocated immediately and irrevocably before the next one arrives. Previous work shows that when the agents' valuations for the items are drawn from known distributions, it is possible (under mild technical assumptions) to find allocations that are envy-free with high probability and Pareto efficient ex-post. We study a \emph{partial-information} setting, where it is possible to elicit ordinal but not cardinal information. When a new item arrives, the algorithm can query each agent for the relative rank of this item with respect to a subset of the past items. When values are drawn from i. i. d. \ distributions, we give an algorithm that is envy-free and $(1-\epsilon)$-welfare-maximizing with high probability. We provide similar guarantees (envy-freeness and a constant approximation to welfare with high probability) even with minimally expressive queries that ask for a comparison to a single previous item. For independent but non-identical agents, we obtain envy-freeness and a constant approximation to Pareto efficiency with high probability. We prove that all our results are asymptotically tight.

AAAI Conference 2022 Conference Paper

How Many Representatives Do We Need? The Optimal Size of a Congress Voting on Binary Issues

  • Manon Revel
  • Tao Lin
  • Daniel Halpern

Aggregating opinions of a collection of agents is a question of interest to a broad array of researchers, ranging from ensemble-learning theorists to political scientists designing democratic institutions. This work investigates the optimal number of agents needed to decide on a binary issue under majority rule. We take an epistemic view where the issue at hand has a ground truth “correct” outcome and each one of n voters votes correctly with a fixed probability, known as their competence level or competence. These competencies come from a fixed distribution D. Observing the competencies, we must choose a specific group that will represent the population. Finally, voters sample a decision (either correct or not), and the group is correct as long as more than half the chosen representatives voted correctly. Assuming that we can identify the best experts, i. e. , those with the highest competence, to form an epistemic congress we find that the optimal congress size should be linear in the population size. This result is striking because it holds even when allowing the top representatives to become arbitrarily accurate, choosing the correct outcome with probabilities approaching 1. We then analyze real-world data, observing that the actual sizes of representative bodies are much smaller than the optimal ones our theoretical results suggest. We conclude by examining under what conditions congresses of sub-optimal sizes would still outperform direct democracy, in which all voters vote. We find that a small congress would beat direct democracy if the rate at which the societal bias towards the ground truth decreases with the population size fast enough, and we quantify the speed needed for constant and polynomial congress sizes.

AAAI Conference 2021 Conference Paper

Aggregating Binary Judgments Ranked by Accuracy

  • Daniel Halpern
  • Gregory Kehne
  • Dominik Peters
  • Ariel D. Procaccia
  • Nisarg Shah
  • Piotr Skowron

We revisit the fundamental problem of predicting a binary ground truth based on independent binary judgments provided by experts. When the accuracy levels of the experts are known, the problem can be solved easily through maximum likelihood estimation. We consider, however, a setting in which we are given only a ranking of the experts by their accuracy. Motivated by the worst-case approach to handle the missing information, we consider three objective functions and design efficient algorithms for optimizing them. In particular, the recently popular distortion objective leads to an intuitive new rule. We show that our algorithms perform well empirically using real and synthetic data in collaborative filtering and political prediction domains.

IJCAI Conference 2021 Conference Paper

Fair and Efficient Resource Allocation with Partial Information

  • Daniel Halpern
  • Nisarg Shah

We study the fundamental problem of allocating indivisible goods to agents with additive preferences. We consider eliciting from each agent only a ranking of her k most preferred goods instead of her full cardinal valuations. We characterize the amount of preference information that must be elicited in order to satisfy envy-freeness up to one good and approximate maximin share guarantee, two widely studied fairness notions. We also analyze the multiplicative loss in social welfare incurred due to the lack of full information with and without fairness requirements.