Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Putting a Compass on the Map of Elections

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2105.07815 v1 pith:RKVN7C7W submitted 2021-05-17 cs.GT econ.EM

Niclas Boehmer , Robert Bredereck , Piotr Faliszewski , Rolf Niedermeier , Stanis{l}aw Szufa This is my paper
classification cs.GTecon.EM
keywords electionscompassinterpretationreal-lifeszufaaamasactinganalyze
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recently, Szufa et al. [AAMAS 2020] presented a "map of elections" that visualizes a set of 800 elections generated from various statistical cultures. While similar elections are grouped together on this map, there is no obvious interpretation of the elections' positions. We provide such an interpretation by introducing four canonical "extreme" elections, acting as a compass on the map. We use them to analyze both a dataset provided by Szufa et al. and a number of real-life elections. In effect, we find a new variant of the Mallows model and show that it captures real-life scenarios particularly well.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. What Voting Rules Actually Do: A Data-Driven Analysis of Multi-Winner Voting

    cs.AI 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    A data-driven framework for counting axiom violations across preference distributions, with the claim that trained neural-network rules minimize violations better than traditional multi-winner rules.

  2. A Social Choice Analysis of Optimism's Retroactive Project Funding

    cs.GT 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    An abstract recommends the moving phantoms rule for RetroPGF funding on welfare and strategyproofness grounds, but the provided body is an unrelated topology paper, making the analysis unverifiable.

Pith tools