Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3274895.3274979acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgisConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Balanced centroidal power diagrams for redistricting

Published: 06 November 2018 Publication History

Abstract

We consider the problem of political redistricting: given the locations of people in a geographical area (e.g. a US state), the goal is to decompose the area into subareas, called districts, so that the populations of the districts are as close as possible and the districts are "compact" and "contiguous," to use the terms referred to in most US state constitutions and/or US Supreme Court rulings.
We study a method that outputs a solution in which each district is the intersection of a convex polygon with the geographical area. The average number of sides per polygon is less than six. The polygons tend to be quite compact. Every two districts differ in population by at most one (so we call the solution balanced).
In fact, the solution is a centroidal power diagram: each polygon has an associated center in R3 such that
• the projection of the center onto the plane z = 0 is the centroid of the locations of people assigned to the polygon, and
• for each person assigned to that polygon, the polygon's center is closest among all centers. The polygons are convex because they are the intersections of 3D Voronoi cells with the plane.
The solution is, in a well-defined sense, a locally optimal solution to the problem of choosing centers in the plane and choosing an assignment of people to those 2-d centers so as to minimize the sum of squared distances subject to the assignment being balanced.
A practical problem with this approach is that, in real-world redistricting, exact locations of people are unknown. Instead, the input consists of polygons (census blocks) and associated populations. A real redistricting must not split census blocks. We therefore propose a second phase that perturbs the solution slightly so it does not split census blocks. In our experiments, the second phase achieves this while preserving perfect population balance. The district polygons are no longer convex at the fine scale because their boundaries must follow the boundaries of census blocks, but at a coarse scale they preserve the shape of the original polygons.

References

[1]
Pankaj K. Agarwal, Kyle Fox, Debmalya Panigrahi, Kasturi R. Varadarajan, and Allen Xiao. Faster algorithms for the geometric transportation problem. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Symposium on Computational Geometry, pages 7:1--7:16, 2017.
[2]
Micah Altman and Michael McDonald. The promise and perils of computers in redistricting. Duke J. Const. L. & Pub. Pol'y, 5:69, 2010.
[3]
David Arthur and Sergei Vassilvitskii. k-means++: the advantages of careful seeding. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 1027--1035, 2007.
[4]
Franz Aurenhammer. Power diagrams: Properties, algorithms and applications. SIAM Journal on Computing, 16(1):78--96, February 1987.
[5]
Franz Aurenhammer, Friedrich Hoffmann, and Boris Aronov. Minkowski-type theorems and least-squares clustering. Algorithmica, 20(1):61--76, 1998.
[6]
Michael Balzer and Daniel Heck. Capacity-constrained Voronoi diagrams in finite spaces. In Proceedings of the 5th Annual International Symposium on Voronoi Diagrams in Science and Engineering, Kiev, Ukraine, September 2008. 00014.
[7]
Michael Balzer, Thomas Schlömer, and Oliver Deussen. Capacity-constrained point distributions: A variant of Lloyd's method. Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH 2009, 28(3), August 2009.
[8]
Sachet Bangia, Christy Vaughn Graves, Gregory Herschlag, Han Sung Kang, Justin Luo, Jonathan C Mattingly, and Robert Ravier. Redistricting: Drawing the line. arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.03360, 2017.
[9]
D. P. Bourne and S. M. Roper. Centroidal power diagrams, lloyd's algorithm, and applications to optimal location problems. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 53(6):2545--2569, January 2015.
[10]
United States Census Bureau. Tiger/line with selected demographic and economic data; population % housing unit counts --- blocks. https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/tiger-data.html. accessed September 2017.
[11]
Vincent Cohen-Addad, Philip N. Klein, and Neal E. Young. Balanced power diagrams for redistricting. CoRR, abs/1710.03358, 2017.
[12]
Fernando De Goes, Katherine Breeden, Victor Ostromoukhov, and Mathieu Desbrun. Blue noise through optimal transport. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 31(6):171, 2012.
[13]
Frederic Dorn, Eelko Penninkx, Hans L Bodlaender, and Fedor V Fomin. Efficient exact algorithms on planar graphs: Exploiting sphere cut decompositions. Algorithmica, 58(3):790--810, 2010.
[14]
Qiang Du, Vance Faber, and Max Gunzburger. Centroidal Voronoi tessellations: Applications and algorithms. SIAM review, 41(4):637--676, 1999.
[15]
David Eppstein, Michael T Goodrich, Doruk Korkmaz, and Nil Mamano. Defining equitable geographic districts in road networks via stable matching. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, page 52. ACM, 2017.
[16]
Roland G Fryer Jr and Richard Holden. Measuring the compactness of political districting plans. The Journal of Law and Economics, 54(3):493--535, 2011.
[17]
R. S. Garfinkel and G. L. Nemhauser. Optimal political districting by implicit enumeration techniques. Management Science, 16(8):B-495, April 1970.
[18]
Andrew V. Goldberg. An efficient implementation of a scaling minimum-cost flow algorithm. J. Algorithms, 22(1):1--29, 1997.
[19]
Andrew V Goldberg and Robert Kennedy. An efficient cost scaling algorithm for the assignment problem. Mathematical Programming, 71(2):153--177, 1995.
[20]
Robert E Helbig, Patrick K Orr, and Robert R Roediger. Political redistricting by computer. Communications of the ACM, 15(8):735--741, 1972.
[21]
S. W. Hess, J. B. Weaver, H. J. Siegfeldt, J. N. Whelan, and P. A. Zitlau. Non-partisan political redistricting by computer. Operations Research, 13(6):998--1006, 1965.
[22]
Philip N. Klein and Shay Mozes. Optimization Algorithms for Planar Graphs. http://planarity.org/. accessed June 2018.
[23]
Evan Kleiner and Albert Schueller. A political redistricting tool for the rest of us --- other approaches to redistricting. Convergence (MAA), November 2013.
[24]
Justin Levitt. All about redistricting: Professor Justin Levitt's guide to drawing the electoral lines. http://redistricting.lls.edu/. accessed September 2017.
[25]
Jeffrey B. Lewis, Brandon DeVine, Lincoln Pitcher, and Kenneth C. Martis. Digital boundary definitions of United States Congressional districts, 1789-2012, 2013. Retrieved from http://cdmaps.polisci.ucla.edu on June 12, 2018.
[26]
Hongwei Li, Diego Nehab, Li-Yi Wei, Pedro V. Sander, and Chi-Wing Fu. Fast capacity constrained Voronoi tessellation. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics and Games, I3D '10, pages 13:1--13:1, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM.
[27]
Jonathan C Mattingly and Christy Vaughn. Redistricting and the will of the people. arXiv preprint arXiv:1410.8796, 2014.
[28]
Anuj Mehrotra, Ellis L. Johnson, and George L. Nemhauser. An optimization based heuristic for political districting. Management Science, 44(8):1100--1114, August 1998.
[29]
Stacy Miller. The problem of redistricting: The use of centroidal Voronoi diagrams to build unbiased congressional districts. Senior project, Whitman College, 2007.
[30]
Brian Olson and Warren D. Smith. RangeVoting.org - Theoretical Issues in Districting Algorithms. http://rangevoting.org/TheorDistrict.html, accessed 2017-12-08.
[31]
Andrew Spann, Daniel Kane, and Dan Gulotta. Electoral redistricting with moment of inertia and diminishing halves models. The UMAP Journal, 28(3):281--299, 2007.
[32]
Lukas Svec, Sam Burden, and Aaron Dilley. Applying voronoi diagrams to the redistricting problem. The UMAP Journal, 28(3):313--329, 2007.
[33]
Shi-Qing Xin, Bruno Lévy, Zhonggui Chen, Lei Chu, Yaohui Yu, Changhe Tu, and Wenping Wang. Centroidal power diagrams with capacity constraints: Computation, applications, and extension. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 35(6):1--12, November 2016.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Aggregating community mapsProceedings of the 30th International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems10.1145/3557915.3560961(1-12)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2022
  • (2022)Characterizing Properties and Trade-offs of Centralized Delegation Mechanisms in Liquid DemocracyProceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3531146.3533219(1629-1638)Online publication date: 21-Jun-2022
  • (2022)Political districting to minimize cut edgesMathematical Programming Computation10.1007/s12532-022-00221-5Online publication date: 26-Apr-2022
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
SIGSPATIAL '18: Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems
November 2018
655 pages
ISBN:9781450358897
DOI:10.1145/3274895
Publication rights licensed to ACM. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of a national government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 06 November 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. computational geometry
  2. graph algorithm
  3. optimization
  4. redistricting

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

SIGSPATIAL '18
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

SIGSPATIAL '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 30 of 150 submissions, 20%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 220 of 1,116 submissions, 20%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)32
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 04 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Aggregating community mapsProceedings of the 30th International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems10.1145/3557915.3560961(1-12)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2022
  • (2022)Characterizing Properties and Trade-offs of Centralized Delegation Mechanisms in Liquid DemocracyProceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3531146.3533219(1629-1638)Online publication date: 21-Jun-2022
  • (2022)Political districting to minimize cut edgesMathematical Programming Computation10.1007/s12532-022-00221-5Online publication date: 26-Apr-2022
  • (2021)Algorithms for Gerrymandering over GraphsTheoretical Computer Science10.1016/j.tcs.2021.03.037Online publication date: Mar-2021
  • (2020)A pairwise fair and community-preserving approach to k-center clusteringProceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning10.5555/3524938.3525048(1178-1189)Online publication date: 13-Jul-2020
  • (2020)The impact of highly compact algorithmic redistricting on the rural-versus-urban balanceProceedings of the 28th International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems10.1145/3397536.3422249(397-400)Online publication date: 3-Nov-2020
  • (2020)Trade-offs in Fair RedistrictingProceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society10.1145/3375627.3375802(159-165)Online publication date: 7-Feb-2020
  • (2020)A machine-learning framework for a novel 3-step approach for real-time taxi dispatching2020 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI)10.1109/SSCI47803.2020.9308436(2705-2712)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2020
  • (2020)The gerrymandering jumble: map projections permute districts’ compactness scoresCartography and Geographic Information Science10.1080/15230406.2020.173757547:4(321-335)Online publication date: 13-May-2020
  • (2020)FISSION: A Practical Algorithm for Computing Minimum Balanced Node SeparatorsCombinatorial Optimization and Applications10.1007/978-3-030-64843-5_55(817-832)Online publication date: 4-Dec-2020
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media