Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper provides the first formal theoretical analysis of the Reverse Sequential Proportional Approval Voting (RevSeqPAV) rule, evaluating both its axiomatic proportionality guarantees—via Extended Justified Representation (EJR) variants—and its approximation ratio for optimal PAV scores. Understanding this backward-elimination heuristic is essential for multi-agent preference aggregation, where RevSeqPAV is historically popular yet theoretically under-characterized compared to its forward counterpart. The authors prove strong negative results showing that RevSeqPAV fails standard proportionality and approximation guarantees in general elections, but identify specific structural domain restrictions where meaningful fairness and optimization bounds are recovered.
Greedy backward elimination severely breaks down under unrestricted approval profiles, establishing that Reverse Sequential PAV requires specific domain structure to guarantee even basic proportional representation or constant-factor score approximations.
We study the Reverse Sequential Proportional Approval Voting Rule (RevSeqPAV) in approval-based committee elections. Despite its historical prominence and practical use, its properties and guarantees are much less understood than those of Sequential PAV. We analyze it along two dimensions: proportional representation (measured by Extended Justified Representation, its approximations, and proportionality degree) and approximation of the maximum PAV score of instances. We first establish strong negative results for general, unrestricted election instances and then identify settings in which the rule provides meaningful fairness and optimization guarantees.