Isotonic mechanism for exponential family estimation in machine learning peer review
机器学习同行评审中用于指数族估计的保序机制AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要聚焦评审机制、排序激励与通用统计估计,未直接对应所列计量领域细分。
机器学习同行评审中用于指数族估计的保序机制AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Abstract In 2023, the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) required authors with multiple submissions to rank their papers by perceived quality. In this paper, we leverage these author-specified rankings to enhance peer review in machine learning and artificial intelligence conferences by extending the isotonic mechanism to exponential family distributions. This mechanism produces adjusted scores closely aligned with the original scores while strictly adhering to the author-specified rankings. An appealing feature of the mechanism is its applicability to a broad class of exponential family distributions without requiring knowledge of the specific distribution form. We show an author is incentivized to provide accurate rankings if her utility is a convex additive function of the adjusted review scores. For a subclass of exponential family distributions, we prove that an author reports truthfully only if elicitation involves pairwise comparisons between her submissions, thus highlighting the optimality of rankings in truthful information elicitation. Moreover, the adjusted scores significantly enhance estimation accuracy compared to original scores and achieve near-minimax optimality when ground-truth scores have bounded total variation. We conclude with a numerical analysis using ICML 2023 ranking data, demonstrating substantial estimation improvements in approximating a proxy ground-truth quality of submissions via the isotonic mechanism.