BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Hedayat Zarkoob

Hedayat Zarkoob contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
cs.CYArtificial IntelligenceComputer Science and Game TheoryInformation RetrievalMachine Learningphysics.soc-ph

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
6topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Matching Papers and Reviewers at Large Conferences

Peer-reviewed conferences, the main publication venues in CS, rely critically on matching highly qualified reviewers for each paper. Because of the growing scale of these conferences, the tight timelines on which they operate, and a recent surge in explicitly dishonest behavior, there is now no alternative to performing this matching in an automated way. This paper studies a novel reviewer-paper matching approach that was recently deployed in the 35th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2021), and has since been adopted (wholly or partially) by other conferences including ICML 2022, AAAI 2022, and IJCAI 2022. This approach has three main elements: (1) collecting and processing input data to identify problematic matches and generate reviewer-paper scores; (2) formulating and solving an optimization problem to find good reviewer-paper matchings; and (3) a two-phase reviewing process that shifts reviewing resources away from papers likely to be rejected and towards papers closer to the decision boundary. This paper also describes an evaluation of these innovations based on an extensive post-hoc analysis on real data -- including a comparison with the matching algorithm used in AAAI's previous (2020) iteration -- and supplements this with additional numerical experimentation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Mechanical TA 2: A System for Peer Grading with TA Support

Mechanical TA 2 (MTA2) is an open source web-based peer grading application that leverages trusted TA graders to incentivize high-quality peer review. A previous, prototype implementation of MTA proved the value of the concept, but was neither suitable for use at scale nor easily extensible; MTA2 is a complete reimplementation of the system that overcomes these hurdles. MTA2 serves two, interconnected purposes: facilitating practical peer grading and serving as a testbed for experimentation with different peer grading mechanisms. The system is characterized by a modular design that makes customization easy; support for dividing students into different pools based on their peer-grading prowess; mechanisms for automated calibration and spot checking; and the ability for students to appeal grades and to give feedback about individual reviews.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Report-Sensitive Spot-Checking in Peer-Grading Systems

Peer grading systems make large courses more scalable, provide students with faster and more detailed feedback, and help students to learn by thinking critically about the work of others. A key obstacle to the broader adoption of peer grading systems is motivating students to provide accurate grades. The literature has explored many different approaches to incentivizing accurate grading (which we survey in detail), but the strongest incentive guarantees have been offered by mechanisms that compare peer grades to trusted TA grades with a fixed probability. In this work, we show that less TA work is required when these probabilities are allowed to depend on the grades that students report. We prove this result in a model with two possible grades, arbitrary numbers of agents, no requirement that students grade multiple assignments, arbitrary but homogeneous noisy observation of the ground truth which students can pay a fixed cost to observe, and the possibility of misreporting grades before or after observing this signal. We give necessary and sufficient conditions for our new mechanism's feasibility, prove its optimality under these assumptions, and characterize its improvement over the previous state of the art both analytically and empirically. Finally, we relax our homogeneity assumption, allowing each student and TA to observe the ground truth according to a different noise model.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Smarter Parking: Using AI to Identify Parking Inefficiencies in Vancouver

On-street parking is convenient, but has many disadvantages: on-street spots come at the expense of other road uses such as traffic lanes, transit lanes, bike lanes, or parklets; drivers looking for parking contribute substantially to traffic congestion and hence to greenhouse gas emissions; safety is reduced both due to the fact that drivers looking for spots are more distracted than other road users and that people exiting parked cars pose a risk to cyclists. These social costs may not be worth paying when off-street parking lots are nearby and have surplus capacity. To see where this might be true in downtown Vancouver, we used artificial intelligence techniques to estimate the amount of time it would take drivers to both park on and off street for destinations throughout the city. For on-street parking, we developed (1) a deep-learning model of block-by-block parking availability based on data from parking meters and audits and (2) a computational simulation of drivers searching for an on-street spot. For off-street parking, we developed a computational simulation of the time it would take drivers drive from their original destination to the nearest city-owned off-street lot and then to queue for a spot based on traffic and lot occupancy data. Finally, in both cases we also computed the time it would take the driver to walk from their parking spot to their original destination. We compared these time estimates for destinations in each block of Vancouver's downtown core and each hour of the day. We found many areas where off street would actually save drivers time over searching the streets for a spot, and many more where the time cost for parking off street was small. The identification of such areas provides an opportunity for the city to repurpose valuable curbside space for community-friendly uses more in line with its transportation goals.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access