The ability to measure the satisfaction of (groups of) voters is a crucial prerequisite for formulating proportionality axioms in approval-based participatory budgeting elections. Two common - but very different - ways to measure the satisfaction of a voter consider (i) the number of approved projects and (ii) the total cost of approved projects, respectively. In general, it is difficult to decide which measure of satisfaction best reflects the voters' true utilities. In this paper, we study proportionality axioms with respect to large classes of approval-based satisfaction functions. We establish logical implications among our axioms and related notions from the literature, and we ask whether outcomes can be achieved that are proportional with respect to more than one satisfaction function. We show that this is impossible for the two commonly used satisfaction functions when considering proportionality notions based on extended justified representation, but achievable for a notion based on proportional justified representation. For the latter result, we introduce a strengthening of priceability and show that it is satisfied by several polynomial-time computable rules, including the Method of Equal Shares and Phragm\`en's sequential rule.
翻译:衡量(选民群体)满意度的能力是制定在核准基础上的参与性预算编制选举中的相称性原则的关键先决条件。两种共同的、但非常不同的衡量选民满意度的方法分别考虑到:(一) 核准的项目数目和(二) 核准的项目总费用。一般而言,很难决定哪种满意度最能反映选民真正的公用事业。在本文件中,我们研究了与大量基于批准的各种满意度功能相称性原则。我们确定了我们的原则性概念和文献中的相关概念之间的逻辑影响,我们询问能否取得与一个以上满意度功能相称的结果。我们表明,在考虑基于扩大的合理代表性的相称性概念时,两种常用的满足性功能是不可能的,但对于基于比例合理代表性的概念,则可以实现。后一种结果是,我们引入了一种可定价性,并表明它为若干多时的可调和规则所满足,包括平等份额和Phragm ⁇ en的相继规则。