analiza aiqbench
This research introduces AGORA, a framework that treats participation bias in transit planning not as an uncontrollable input but as a process-design challenge solvable through structured deliberation. By simulating stakeholder agents and governance gates, the study demonstrates how well-structured processes can significantly reduce outcome variance even when attendance is skewed, shifting focus from demographic representation to procedural robustness.
AGORA: Can Deliberation and Governance Gates Absorb Participation Bias in Transit Planning?
arXiv:2606.13696v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Transit network design depends not only on the optimization algorithm but also on who shows up to the public hearing. Current practice often collects one-directional comments from self-selected attendees, leaving participant mix as an uncontrolled source of outcome variation. We present AGORA, a framework that holds the network, demand, and solver fixed while systematically varying meeting composition through stakeholder agents, structured deliberation, and governance gates. Across two standard benchmark networks at different scales, we find that (i) aggregate outcomes vary little across compositions, but on tail risk and fairness disparity, representative sampling still tends to outperform skewed compositions; (ii) without deliberation, composition produces no variation at all, showing that deliberation is the mechanism through which who attends affects outcomes; and (iii) governance gates compress cross-profile variance without shifting the average outcome on Mandl, but low acceptance on Mumford0 shows thresholds require instance-specific calibration. These findings reframe participation bias from an uncontrollable input to a process-design problem: even without guaranteed representative attendance, well-structured deliberation and governance criteria can substantially reduce how much outcomes depend on who is in the room.
Title:AGORA: Can Deliberation and Governance Gates Absorb Participation Bias in Transit Planning?
Abstract:Transit network design depends not only on the optimization algorithm but also on who shows up to the public hearing. Current practice often collects one-directional comments from self-selected attendees, leaving participant mix as an uncontrolled source of outcome variation. We present AGORA, a framework that holds the network, demand, and solver fixed while systematically varying meeting composition through stakeholder agents, structured deliberation, and governance gates. Across two standard benchmark networks at different scales, we find that (i) aggregate outcomes vary little across compositions, but on tail risk and fairness disparity, representative sampling still tends to outperform skewed compositions; (ii) without deliberation, composition produces no variation at all, showing that deliberation is the mechanism through which who attends affects outcomes; and (iii) governance gates compress cross-profile variance without shifting the average outcome on Mandl, but low acceptance on Mumford0 shows thresholds require instance-specific calibration. These findings reframe participation bias from an uncontrollable input to a process-design problem: even without guaranteed representative attendance, well-structured deliberation and governance criteria can substantially reduce how much outcomes depend on who is in the room.
Computers and Society (cs.CY); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Multiagent Systems (cs.MA); Social and Information Networks (cs.SI)
arXiv:2606.13696 [cs.CY]
(or arXiv:2606.13696v1 [cs.CY] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.13696 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 295 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
DeliChess: A Multi-party Dialogue Dataset for Deliberation in Chess Puzzle Solving
arXiv · 5 aug. 2026
Toward Collective-Centric Evaluation of Preference Inference for Participatory Democracy
arXiv · 5 sept. 2026
VIRENA: Virtual Arena for Research, Education, and Democratic Innovation
arXiv · 7 oct. 2026
DeliChess: A Multi-party Dialogue Dataset for Deliberation in Chess Puzzle Solving
arXiv · 4 iun. 2026