# On Meritocracy in Optimal Set Selection

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.11932 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.11932/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 16 of its 34 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 23 Feb 2021.

## Builds on (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [Modeling Tabular data using Conditional GAN](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.00503/) (2019)
- [On the Apparent Conflict Between Individual and Group Fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.06883/) (2019)
- [Equity of Attention: Amortizing Individual Fairness in Rankings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.01788/) (2018)
- [FA*IR: A Fair Top-k Ranking Algorithm](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.06368/) (2017)
- [Lazier Than Lazy Greedy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1409.7938/) (2014)
- [Ranking with Fairness Constraints](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.06840/) (2017)
- [Policy Learning for Fairness in Ranking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.04056/) (2019)
- [Selection Problems in the Presence of Implicit Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1801.03533/) (2018)
- [Interventions for Ranking in the Presence of Implicit Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08767/) (2020)
- [Participatory Budgeting: Models and Approaches](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.00606/) (2020)
- [Properties of Multiwinner Voting Rules](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1506.02891/) (2015)
- [On Fair Selection in the Presence of Implicit Variance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.13699/) (2020)
- [Do I Look Like a Criminal? Examining how Race Presentation Impacts Human Judgement of Recidivism](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.01111/) (2020)
- [Affirmative Action Policies for Top-k Candidates Selection, With an Application to the Design of Policies for University Admissions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.09947/) (2019)
- [Causal Interventions for Fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.02380/) (2018)
- [Fair and Optimal Cohort Selection for Linear Utilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.07684/) (2021)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [The Initial Screening Order Problem](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15398/) (2023)
- [Sequential Cohort Selection under Uncertainty](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.16386/) (2025)
- [Simulating Eutopia: Revisiting Long-term Fairness with Outcomes, Performativity, and Dynamics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.19389/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Typically, merit is defined with respect to some intrinsic measure of worth. We instead consider a setting where an individual's worth is relative: when a Decision Maker (DM) selects a set of individuals from a population to maximise expected utility, it is natural to consider the Expected Marginal Contribution (EMC) of each person to the utility. We show that this notion satisfies an axiomatic definition of fairness for this setting. We also show that for certain policy structures, this notion of fairness is aligned with maximising expected utility, while for linear utility functions it is identical to the Shapley value. However, for certain natural policies, such as those that select individuals with a specific set of attributes (e.g. high enough test scores for college admissions), there is a trade-off between meritocracy and utility maximisation. We analyse the effect of constraints on the policy on both utility and fairness in extensive experiments based on college admissions and outcomes in Norwegian universities.