online platform designers

Abstract: Online comment sections let a small number of vocal individuals reach far beyond their own networks. We conduct a large-scale field experiment on Facebook that randomizes the presence and stance of comments beneath posts for a racial justice organization, reaching around one million U.S. users. Opposing comments increase reactions, comments, and link clicks by 15-43 percent relative to no comments, whereas supportive comments have little effect. A complementary survey experiment shows that similar opposing comments make attitudes less progressive and reduce donations to the organization. Through a common feature of online platforms, the vocal few can exert outsized influence.

Abstract: We study proportional representation in temporal voting, where one candidate is selected in each round. While prior work has focused on approval ballots, we consider ranked preferences, which may change over time. A natural approach treats each voter's top candidates as approved, but the right cutoff may differ across voters and rounds. We therefore require proportionality to hold for every admissible choice of cutoffs, whether fixed and common, common but varying across rounds, or set individually for each voter in each round. Combining these interpretations with temporal versions of justified representation (JR), proportional JR (PJR), extended JR (EJR), and proportionality for solid coalitions (PSC) gives us a hierarchy of axioms. We ask which of these axioms can be guaranteed, and with how much knowledge of the future. Unlike with approval ballots, no version of EJR can be guaranteed, and for the other axioms, flexibility in the cutoffs comes at a price. With a fixed common cutoff, JR, PJR, and PSC can be guaranteed, but only by rules that see all preferences in advance. Once the cutoff may vary across rounds, even such rules cannot guarantee JR or PSC for groups that agree in only some rounds. For groups that agree in every round, however, knowing only the number of rounds suffices for PJR in polynomial time, and PSC needs no knowledge of the future at all. Under individual cutoffs, no version of JR or PJR can be guaranteed, yet a rule as simple as serial dictatorship achieves PJR up to an additive loss that no rule can improve on, however much it knows. Natural preference restrictions restore exact guarantees. Finally, we show that checking our axioms is often coNP-complete; but perhaps surprisingly, a stronger axiom can be easier to check.

Abstract: AI systems can strengthen democracy by supporting deliberation at scale by addressing cognitive, social, platform-design, and market-driven frictions, while preserving human agency. Unlike proposals such as liquid democracy that restructure representation through vote delegation, in this position paper, we argue that AI-assisted deliberation offers a more promising path by lowering barriers to meaningful engagement without substituting machine judgment for human choice. Drawing on evidence from online deliberation platforms and experimental research, we identify four guiding principles: preserving agency and autonomy, encouraging mutual respect, promoting equality and inclusiveness, and augmenting rather than substituting active citizenship. We also address critical challenges, including alignment, sycophancy, training bias, and over-reliance on AI systems. We call on the machine learning community to develop deliberation-focused AI systems evaluated not on engagement metrics but on their capacity to facilitate informed, representative, and friction-robust discourse.

Abstract: Sequential deliberation is a mechanism for collective decision making: at each round, a uniformly randomly selected pair is asked to revise a collective outcome, which then becomes the reference point for the next round. Existing theory by Fain et al.~\cite{fain2017sequential} treats the current outcome solely as the disagreement alternative in bargaining. Yet an existing draft, policy, or proposal might carry social influence and anchor participants' expressed positions toward the status quo. We introduce anchored sequential deliberation on a one-dimensional decision space. In each round, two participants with bliss points $U$ and $V$ shift their positions toward the previous outcome $O_{t-1}$ with anchoring strength $λ$, then Nash-bargain using $O_{t-1}$ as the disagreement alternative. The update simplifies to $O_t=(1-λ)\mathsf{Median}\{U,V,O_{t-1}\}+λO_{t-1}$. We establish a convergence--stability trade-off. For every population distribution and $λ<1$, the process has a unique stationary distribution. A monotone coupling yields a $1$-Wasserstein contraction factor of at most $\frac{1+λ}{2}$ and at least $λ$; thus, stronger anchoring slows mixing. On the other hand, stationary social cost weakly decreases with $λ$, although the worst-case distortion remains $\frac{1+\sqrt{2}}{2}$. We also identify a unique \emph{deliberative fixed point}, where the expected unanchored movement is zero, and prove that the stationary distribution concentrates around it as $λ\to 1$. For the uniform population, stationary distortion lies between $1+\frac{1-λ}{9+7λ}$ and $1+\frac{1-λ}{6(1+λ)}$, with both bounds approaching $1$ as $λ\to1$. Simulations for uniform and Beta populations show that stronger anchoring slows mixing, concentrates the stationary distribution, and lowers stationary distortion in these instances.

Abstract: Simulated societies of large language model agents are used to study online polarization, and separately to study collective intelligence, but the two are rarely measured in the same system. It is therefore difficult to say whether a society's personality composition shapes both, or whether reducing polarization costs collective competence. We present TraitMix, an experimental design in which the Big Five composition of a simulated social network, both trait levels and trait heterogeneity, is a controlled experimental variable, and in which polarization and collective performance are measured in the same runs. Across 991 simulations of hundred-agent societies, spanning six contested topics and six language models, trait heterogeneity has the largest measured effects, acting in opposite directions on two faces of polarization: varied societies hold more dispersed opinions while being less segregated into camps, so homogeneous societies are not moderate but consensual echo chambers. Trait effects are not additive, as Agreeableness determines the sign of Openness, an interaction that replicates across models although the primary model's estimate is influence-driven. Contrary to the trade-off the study was designed to measure, no polarization measure predicts poorer collective performance, and cross-cutting interaction is the only one of four whose association with collective accuracy survives partialling on the aggregation identity. We report ablations removing two potential measurement circularities, an induction gate applied to every model, and the measures that failed them.

Abstract: In approval-based committee voting, proportional approval voting (PAV) is a well-studied rule that combines proportional representation with Pareto efficiency. However, computing a PAV committee is NP-hard, raising a natural question: Can the proportionality and efficiency properties of PAV be achieved via computationally efficient procedures? We make two contributions toward answering this question. First, building on the known proportionality guarantees of the local-search-based variant of PAV (or local PAV), we systematically study its efficiency properties. We show that local PAV committees are weakly Pareto optimal, meaning that no other committee is strictly preferred by every voter. We also identify limitations: Local PAV guarantees only a $2$-approximation to fractional Pareto optimality ($2$-fPO) and a $2/3$-approximation to the optimal PAV score, and both bounds are tight. In contrast, global PAV is Pareto optimal and satisfies the stronger $α^\star$-fPO guarantee, where $α^\star \approx 1.346$ is the unique solution of $\int_0^{α^\star} \frac{1-e^{-y}}{y} \, dy = 1$, and this approximation is tight. Second, we design a polynomial-time algorithm that combines the best of these guarantees. The committee returned by our algorithm satisfies EJR$+$ (a proportionality guarantee), $α^\star$-fPO, and weak Pareto optimality. It also achieves a $0.79$-approximation to the optimal PAV score, matching the best possible polynomial-time approximation assuming $P \neq NP$. Our algorithm works by pipage rounding a concave relaxation of the PAV objective and using that committee to initialize local PAV, thereby combining global approximation guarantees with local search stability.