Proportional representation (PR) is often discussed in voting settings as a major desideratum. For the past century or so, it is common both in practice and in the academic literature to jump to single transferable vote (STV) as the solution for achieving PR. Some of the most prominent electoral reform movements around the globe are pushing for the adoption of STV. It has been termed a major open problem to design a voting rule that satisfies the same PR properties as STV and better monotonicity properties. In this paper, we first present a taxonomy of proportional representation axioms for general weak order preferences, some of which generalise and strengthen previously introduced concepts. We then present a rule called Expanding Approvals Rule (EAR) that satisfies properties stronger than the central PR axiom satisfied by STV, can handle indifferences in a convenient and computationally efficient manner, and also satisfies better candidate monotonicity properties. In view of this, our proposed rule seems to be a compelling solution for achieving proportional representation in voting settings.

We study hedonic games with dichotomous preferences. Hedonic games are cooperative games in which players desire to form coalitions, but only care about the makeup of the coalitions of which they are members; they are indifferent about the makeup of other coalitions. The assumption of dichotomous preferences means that, additionally, each player's preference relation partitions the set of coalitions of which that player is a member into just two equivalence classes: satisfactory and unsatisfactory. A player is indifferent between satisfactory coalitions, and is indifferent between unsatisfactory coalitions, but strictly prefers any satisfactory coalition over any unsatisfactory coalition. We develop a succinct representation for such games, in which each player's preference relation is represented by a propositional formula. We show how solution concepts for hedonic games with dichotomous preferences are characterised by propositional formulas.

Hedonic games provide a model of coalition formation in which a set of agents is partitioned into coalitions and the agents have preferences over which set they belong to. Recently, Aziz et. al. (2014) have initiated the study of hedonic games with dichotomous preferences, where each agent either approves or disapproves of a given coalition. In this work, we study the computational complexity of questions related to finding optimal and stable partitions in dichotomous hedonic games under various ways of restricting and representing the collection of approved coalitions. Encouragingly, many of these problems turn out to be polynomial-time solvable. In particular, we show that an individually stable outcome always exists and can be found in polynomial time. We also provide efficient algorithms for cases in which agents approve only few coalitions, in which they only approve intervals, and in which they only approve sets of size 2 (the roommates case). These algorithms are complemented by NP-hardness results, especially for representations that are very expressive, such as in the case when agents' goals are given by propositional formulas.

The probabilistic serial rule is one of the most well-established and desirable rules for the random assignment problem. We present the egalitarian simultaneous reservation social decision scheme – an extension of probabilistic serial to the more general setting of randomized social choice. We consider various desirable fairness, efficiency, and strategic properties of social decision schemes and show that egalitarian simultaneous reservation compares favorably against existing rules. Finally, we define a more general class of social decision schemes called simultaneous reservation, that contains egalitarian simultaneous reservation as well as the serial dictatorship rules. We show that outcomes of simultaneous reservation characterize efficiency with respect to a natural refinement of stochastic dominance.

We consider the problem of allocating fairly a set of indivisible goods among agents from the point of view of compact representation and computational complexity. We start by assuming that agents have dichotomous preferences expressed by propositional formulae. We express efficiency and envy-freeness in a logical setting, which reveals unexpected connections to nonmonotonic reasoning. Then we identify the complexity of determining whether there exists an efficient and envy-free allocation, for several notions of efficiency, when preferences are represented in a succinct way (as well as restrictions of this problem). We first study the problem under the assumption that preferences are dichotomous, and then in the general case.