Linear Social Choice with Few Queries: A Moment-Based Approach
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Most social choice rules assume access to full rankings, while current alignment practice -- despite aiming for diversity -- typically treats voters as anonymous and comparisons as independent, effectively extracting only about one bit per voter. Motivated by this gap, we study social choice under an extreme communication budget in the linear social choice model, where each voter's utility is the inner product between a latent voter type and the embedding of the context and candidate. The candidate and voter spaces may be very large or even infinite. Our core idea is to model the electorate as an unknown distribution over voter types and to recover its moments as informative summary statistics for candidate selection. We show that one pairwise comparison per voter already suffices to select a candidate that maximizes social welfare, but this elicitation cannot identify the second moment and therefore cannot support objectives that account for inequality. We prove that two pairwise comparisons per voter, or alternatively a single graded comparison, identify the second moment; moreover, these richer queries suffice to identify all moments, and hence the entire voter-type distribution. These results enable principled solutions to a range of social choice objectives including inequality-aware welfare criteria such as taking into account the spread of voter utilities and choosing a representative subset.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Mar 2026.
Builds on
23 of 58 references.
References · 23
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
- 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
- 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
- 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,588
- 2023BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Datasetcited by 860
- 2023The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Modelscited by 716
- 2024A Roadmap to Pluralistic Alignmentcited by 184
- 2023Distributional Preference Learning: Understanding and Accounting for Hidden Context in RLHFcited by 133
- 2017A Voting-Based System for Ethical Decision Makingcited by 55
- 2024Axioms for AI Alignment from Human Feedbackcited by 52
- 2024Learning general Gaussian mixtures with efficient score matchingcited by 44
11 more
- 2024Distributional Preference Alignment of LLMs via Optimal Transportcited by 26
- 2024Direct Preference Optimization With Unobserved Preference Heterogeneity: The Necessity of Ternary Preferencescited by 23
- 2025Direct Alignment with Heterogeneous Preferencescited by 19
- 2022Representation with Incomplete Votescited by 13
- 2025Towards Reward Fairness in RLHF: From a Resource Allocation Perspectivecited by 9
- 2024Learning Linear Utility Functions From Pairwise Comparison Queriescited by 8
- 2019Peeking Behind the Ordinal Curtain: Improving Distortion via Cardinal Queriescited by 6
- 2024Computing Voting Rules with Elicited Incomplete Votescited by 5
- 2025Judging with Confidence: Calibrating Autoraters to Preference Distributionscited by 3
- 2025Learning Correlated Reward Models: Statistical Barriers and Opportunitiescited by 3
- 2025Optimized Distortion in Linear Social Choicecited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
- 2026AI Alignment From Social Choice Perspectivescited by 2
- 2026AI Alignment From Social Choice Perspectives19 Jun 2026