Source author record

Jakub Nawała

Jakub Nawała appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

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

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Generalised Score Distribution: Underdispersed Continuation of the Beta-Binomial Distribution

A class of discrete probability distributions contains distributions with limited support. A typical example is some variant of a Likert scale, with response mapped to either the $\{1, 2, \ldots, 5\}$ or $\{-3, -2, \ldots, 2, 3\}$ set. An interesting subclass of discrete distributions with finite support are distributions limited to two parameters and having no more than one change in probability monotonicity. The main contribution of this paper is to propose a family of distributions fitting the above description, which we call the Generalised Score Distribution (GSD) class. The proposed GSD class covers the whole set of possible mean and variances, for any fixed and finite support. Furthermore, the GSD class can be treated as an underdispersed continuation of a reparametrized beta-binomial distribution. The GSD class parameters are intuitive and can be easily estimated by the method of moments. We also offer a Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) algorithm for the GSD class and evidence that the class properly describes response distributions coming from 24 Multimedia Quality Assessment experiments. At last, we show that the GSD class can be represented as a sum of dichotomous zero-one random variables, which points to an interesting interpretation of the class.

preprint2022arXiv

Reproducibility Companion Paper: Describing Subjective Experiment Consistency by $p$-Value P-P Plot

In this paper we reproduce experimental results presented in our earlier work titled "Describing Subjective Experiment Consistency by $p$-Value P-P Plot" that was presented in the course of the 28th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. The paper aims at verifying the soundness of our prior results and helping others understand our software framework. We present artifacts that help reproduce tables, figures and all the data derived from raw subjective responses that were included in our earlier work. Using the artifacts we show that our results are reproducible. We invite everyone to use our software framework for subjective responses analyses going beyond reproducibility efforts.

preprint2022arXiv

Systematic Analysis of Experiment Precision Measures and Methods for Experiments Comparison

The notion of experiment precision quantifies the variance of user ratings in a subjective experiment. Although there exist measures that assess subjective experiment precision, there are no systematic analyses of these measures available in the literature. To the best of our knowledge, there is also no systematic framework in the Multimedia Quality Assessment field for comparing subjective experiments in terms of their precision. Therefore, the main idea of this paper is to propose a framework for comparing subjective experiments in the field of MQA based on appropriate experiment precision measures. We present three experiment precision measures and three related experiment precision comparison methods. We systematically analyse the performance of the measures and methods proposed. We do so both through a simulation study (varying user rating variance and bias) and by using data from four real-world Quality of Experience (QoE) subjective experiments. In the simulation study we focus on crowdsourcing QoE experiments, since they are known to generate ratings with higher variance and bias, when compared to traditional subjective experiment methodologies. We conclude that our proposed measures and related comparison methods properly capture experiment precision (both when tested on simulated and real-world data). One of the measures also proves capable of dealing with even significantly biased responses. We believe our experiment precision assessment framework will help compare different subjective experiment methodologies. For example, it may help decide which methodology results in more precise user ratings. This may potentially inform future standardisation activities.