Open Research Repository ORR
Not a member yet
2835 research outputs found
Sort by
HyperFA∗IR:A hypergeometric approach to fair rankings with finite candidate pool
No full textRanking algorithms play a pivotal role in decision-making processes across diverse domains, from search engines to job applications. When rankings directly impact individuals, ensuring fairness becomes essential, particularly for groups that are marginalised or misrepresented in the data. Most of the existing group fairness frameworks often rely on ensuring proportional representation of protected groups. However, these approaches face limitations in accounting for the stochastic nature of ranking processes or the finite size of candidate pools. To this end, we present hyperFA∗IR, a framework for assessing and enforcing fairness in rankings drawn from a finite set of candidates. It relies on a generative process based on the hypergeometric distribution, which models real-world scenarios by sampling without replacement from fixed group sizes. This approach improves fairness assessment when top-k selections are large relative to the pool or when protected groups are small. We compare our approach to the widely used binomial model, which treats each draw as independent with fixed probability, and demonstrate-both analytically and empirically-that our method more accurately reproduces the statistical properties of sampling from a finite population. To operationalise this framework, we propose a Monte Carlo-based algorithm that efficiently detects unfair rankings by avoiding computationally expensive parameter tuning. Finally, we adapt our generative approach to define affirmative action policies by introducing weights into the sampling process
Federalism and representation:Evidence from state abortion laws in the aftermath of Dobbs vs. Jackson women’s health organization
No full textSupporters of devolution argue that local policies better reflect citizen preferences than “one size fits all” policies enacted at the federal level. To test this claim, we leverage the sudden devolution of abortion policy-making that resulted from the Dobbs decision. Using multilevel regression with poststratification, we estimate the latest gestational age at which the average resident of each state believes abortion should be permitted and compare these estimates to state policies before and after the Dobbs ruling. We demonstrate that policies prior to Dobbs were more liberal than the average constituent’s preference in every state. In the wake of Dobbs, although this nationwide liberal bias evaporated, absolute distance between public preferences and policy was essentially unchanged. Instead of bringing policies closer to preferences, devolution allowed more liberal states to maintain policies that were “too liberal” for their average resident and opened the door for conservative states to leapfrog the preferences of their constituents
Effective Remedies and Reinforcing Procedural Guarantees of Constitutionalism in Europe
No full textIlliberal regimes show signs of mutual learning, which would need to be matched with similarly innovative solutions on the side of constitutional resilience. The paper, contributing to this process, looks first at illiberalism’s internal tension that could be exploited to the benefit of strengthening constitutionalist guarantees. The approaches of the CJEU and the ECtHR on what counts as effective remedy in national law could be turned into an effective conditionality instrument. Constitutionally consequential damages litigation can play an additional role as illiberal regimes seem to show more responsiveness to financial incentives than other forms of external pressure
The Puzzle of Freedom:Structure and Agency in International Adjudication
No full textLike any other institutions, international courts are both constrained and free, structured and open-ended in their production of legal outcomes. Yet, after decades of investigation, the driving forces behind international adjudication remain somewhat elusive. If international norms are textually indeterminate, then what guides their interpretation and application to concrete cases? To what systemic pressures are courts subject? And what forms of discretion do they enjoy? This chapter begins to answer these questions by focusing on the micro-level practices, relationships, and struggles of the legal experts populating international judicial institutions. On the one hand, these socio-professional dynamics are constrained by existing social arrangements, including the institutional design of courts, the networked interactions among individual actors, and the competent performances that punctuate the adjudicative process. On the other hand, existing social arrangements are open to contestation, renegotiation, and contingency, thereby creating opportunities for unorthodox and creative lawyering. As such, the socio-professional dynamics that take place inside international courts are both the vehicle of reproduction of legal outcomes and the source from which legal change originates
