Skip to content
Off-topic for aiqbench

Off-topic for aiqbench

This story was gathered from a source we follow but falls outside AI and quantum coverage, so there is no aiqbench take for it.

Improving Randomized Metric Distortion to 2.3282

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2608.29308v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In metric social choice, each voter ranks a set of $m$ candidates by her distance to them in an unknown metric space. The cost of a candidate is its average distance to the voters. A randomized voting rule must use only the rankings to choose a lottery over candidates. Its distortion is the worst-case ratio between the expected cost under the lottery it returns and the cost of the best candidate. Charikar, Ramakrishnan, Wang, and Wu [JACM 2024] prove an upper bound of $2.753$, establishing a constant separation from deterministic rules, for which the best achievable distortion is $3$. Independently, Frank [arXiv:2608.17863] and Ye [arXiv:2608.21202] improve the bound to $2.5$, using an equal mixture of maximal lottery and Integrated Veto. The existing arguments do not yield a better bound with any mixture of these rules. We break this barrier with a new ingredient, a random-size stable lottery. Let $D$ be a random variable over the domain of positive integers. A random-size stable lottery $\mathrm{RSL}_D$ guarantees that the probability of a random voter preferring any fixed candidate $c$ to her favorite of $D$ i.i.d. draws from $\mathrm{RSL}_D$ is at most $\mathbb{E}[1/(D+1)]$, where the probability also averages over $D$. When $D=k$ deterministically, this reduces to the stable $k$-lottery of Charikar, Ramakrishnan, Tan, and Wang [EC 2025]; the case $k=1$ is precisely a maximal lottery. Their minimax argument for a fixed $k$ easily generalizes to a random $D$. Our main contribution is to show how stability with respect to a random $D$ can be used to bound distortion. By mixing a suitably chosen random-size stable lottery with Integrated Veto, we get distortion at most $11641/5000=2.3282$. The proof combines infinite-dimensional conic linear-programming duality, heuristic nonlinear optimization, and exact rational verification via the Bernstein basis.

Title:Improving Randomized Metric Distortion to 2.3282

Abstract:In metric social choice, each voter ranks a set of $m$ candidates by her distance to them in an unknown metric space. The cost of a candidate is its average distance to the voters. A randomized voting rule must use only the rankings to choose a lottery over candidates. Its distortion is the worst-case ratio between the expected cost under the lottery it returns and the cost of the best candidate. Charikar, Ramakrishnan, Wang, and Wu [JACM 2024] prove an upper bound of $2.753$, establishing a constant separation from deterministic rules, for which the best achievable distortion is $3$. Independently, Frank [arXiv:2608.17863] and Ye [arXiv:2608.21202] improve the bound to $2.5$, using an equal mixture of maximal lottery and Integrated Veto. The existing arguments do not yield a better bound with any mixture of these rules. We break this barrier with a new ingredient, a random-size stable lottery. Let $D$ be a random variable over the domain of positive integers. A random-size stable lottery $\mathrm{RSL}_D$ guarantees that the probability of a random voter preferring any fixed candidate $c$ to her favorite of $D$ i.i.d. draws from $\mathrm{RSL}_D$ is at most $\mathbb{E}[1/(D+1)]$, where the probability also averages over $D$. When $D=k$ deterministically, this reduces to the stable $k$-lottery of Charikar, Ramakrishnan, Tan, and Wang [EC 2025]; the case $k=1$ is precisely a maximal lottery. Their minimax argument for a fixed $k$ easily generalizes to a random $D$. Our main contribution is to show how stability with respect to a random $D$ can be used to bound distortion. By mixing a suitably chosen random-size stable lottery with Integrated Veto, we get distortion at most $11641/5000=2.3282$. The proof combines infinite-dimensional conic linear-programming duality, heuristic nonlinear optimization, and exact rational verification via the Bernstein basis.

Computer Science and Game Theory (cs.GT); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2608.29308 [cs.GT]

(or arXiv:2608.29308v1 [cs.GT] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.29308 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 396 words

Related coverage