Displaying 1 - 3 of 3
-
Guest, O., Kanayet, F. J., & Love, B. C. (2019). Gerrymandering and computational redistricting. Journal of Computational Social Science, 2, 119-131. doi:10.1007/s42001-019-00053-9.
Abstract
Partisan gerrymandering poses a threat to democracy. Moreover, the complexity of the districting task may exceed human capacities. One potential solution is using computational models to automate the districting process by optimizing objective and open criteria, such as how spatially compact districts are. We formulated one such model that minimised pairwise distance between voters within a district. Using US Census Bureau data, we confirmed our prediction that the difference in compactness between the computed and actual districts would be greatest for states that are large and, therefore, difficult for humans to properly district given their limited capacities. The computed solutions highlighted differences in how humans and machines solve this task with machine solutions more fully optimised and displaying emergent properties not evident in human solutions. These results suggest a division of labour in which humans debate and formulate districting criteria whereas machines optimise the criteria to draw the district boundaries. We discuss how criteria can be expanded beyond notions of compactness to include other factors, such as respecting municipal boundaries, historic communities, and relevant legislation. -
Guest, O., & Rougier, N. P. (2016). "What is computational reproducibility?" and "Diversity in reproducibility". IEEE CIS Newsletter on Cognitive and Developmental Systems, 13(2), 4 and 12.
-
Cooper, R. P., & Guest, O. (2014). Implementations are not specifications: Specification, replication and experimentation in computational cognitive modeling. Cognitive Systems Research, 27, 42-49. doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2013.05.001.
Abstract
Contemporary methods of computational cognitive modeling have recently been criticized by Addyman and French (2012) on the grounds that they have not kept up with developments in computer technology and human–computer interaction. They present a manifesto for change according to which, it is argued, modelers should devote more effort to making their models accessible, both to non-modelers (with an appropriate easy-to-use user interface) and modelers alike. We agree that models, like data, should be freely available according to the normal standards of science, but caution against confusing implementations with specifications. Models may embody theories, but they generally also include implementation assumptions. Cognitive modeling methodology needs to be sensitive to this. We argue that specification, replication and experimentation are methodological approaches that can address this issue.
Share this page