When far is better: The Chamberlin-Courant approach to obnoxious committee selection
Sushmita Gupta, Tanmay Inamdar, Pallavi Jain, Daniel Lokshtanov, Fahad, Panolan, Saket Saurabh

TL;DR
This paper studies a novel 'obnoxious' committee selection model where larger distances imply higher satisfaction, analyzing computational complexity and proposing algorithms for different cases in metric and Euclidean spaces.
Contribution
It introduces a new model for committee selection with 'far is better' preferences, analyzing complexity and providing polynomial algorithms and hardness results.
Findings
Polynomial-time solvability for certain cases in Euclidean and metric spaces.
NP-hardness results for intermediate and general cases.
Exploration of approximation algorithms for complex scenarios.
Abstract
Classical work on metric space based committee selection problem interprets distance as ``near is better''. In this work, motivated by real-life situations, we interpret distance as ``far is better''. Formally stated, we initiate the study of ``obnoxious'' committee scoring rules when the voters' preferences are expressed via a metric space. To this end, we propose a model where large distances imply high satisfaction and study the egalitarian avatar of the well-known Chamberlin-Courant voting rule and some of its generalizations. For a given integer value , the committee size k, a voter derives satisfaction from only the -th favorite committee member; the goal is to maximize the satisfaction of the least satisfied voter. For the special case of , this yields the egalitarian Chamberlin-Courant rule. In this paper, we consider general metric…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
