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

László Csató

László Csató contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Applicationsphysics.soc-phmath.OCArtificial IntelligenceComputer Science and Game Theoryecon.GNq-fin.ECDigital Librariesecon.THmath.STStatistics Theory

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
16works
0followers
11topics
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

16 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Quantifying incentive (in)compatibility: A case study from sports

For every sports tournament, it is an important requirement to provide contestants with the appropriate incentives to perform. However, incentive compatibility is usually considered an all or nothing (binary) concept in the academic literature, that is, the rules are proved to be either strategy-proof or vulnerable to manipulation. Our paper aims to present a method for quantifying the violation of this theoretical property through the example of the European Qualifiers for the 2022 FIFA World Cup. Even though that competition is known to be incentive incompatible since lower-ranked Nations League group winners are interested in the success of their higher-ranked peers, the extent of the problem has remained unexplored until now. Computer simulations reveal that the threat of tanking can be substantially mitigated by adding a carefully chosen set of draw restrictions, which offers a justifiable and transparent solution to improve fairness. Sports governing bodies are encouraged to take our findings into account.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

The efficacy of tournament designs

Tournaments are a widely used mechanism to rank alternatives in a noisy environment. This paper investigates a fundamental issue of economics in tournament design: what is the best usage of limited resources, that is, how should the alternatives be compared pairwise to best approximate their true but latent ranking. We consider various formats including knockout tournaments, multi-stage championships consisting of round-robin groups followed by single elimination, and the Swiss-system. They are evaluated via Monte-Carlo simulations under six different assumptions on winning probabilities. Comparing the same pair of alternatives multiple times turns out to be an inefficacious policy. While seeding can increase the efficacy of the knockout and group-based designs, its influence remains marginal unless one has an unrealistically good estimation on the true ranking of the players. The Swiss-system is found to be the most accurate among all these tournament formats, especially in its ability to rank all participants. A possible explanation is that it does not eliminate a player after a single loss, while it takes the history of the comparisons into account. The results can be especially interesting for emerging esports, where the tournament designs are not yet solidified.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Fair tournament design: A flaw of the UEFA Euro 2020 qualification

The integrity of a sport can be seriously undermined if its rules punish winning as this creates incentives for strategic manipulation. Therefore, a sports tournament can be called unfair if the overall win probabilities are not ordered according to the teams' ranking based on their past performances. We present how statistical methods can contribute to choosing a tournament format that is in line with the above axiom. In particular, the qualification for the 2020 UEFA European Championship is shown to violate this requirement: being a top team in the lowest-ranked League D of the 2018/19 UEFA Nations League substantially increases the probability of qualifying compared to being a bottom team in the higher-ranked League C. The unfairness can be remarkably reduced or even eliminated with slightly changing the path formation policy of the UEFA Euro 2020 qualifying play-offs. The misaligned design has severely punished a team for winning a match years before. Since the deficiency is an inherent feature of the qualifying process, the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) should reconsider the format of future tournaments to eliminate the unfair advantage enjoyed by certain teams.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Inconsistency thresholds for incomplete pairwise comparison matrices

Pairwise comparison matrices are increasingly used in settings where some pairs are missing. However, there exist few inconsistency indices for similar incomplete data sets and no reasonable measure has an associated threshold. This paper generalises the famous rule of thumb for the acceptable level of inconsistency, proposed by Saaty, to incomplete pairwise comparison matrices. The extension is based on choosing the missing elements such that the maximal eigenvalue of the incomplete matrix is minimised. Consequently, the well-established values of the random index cannot be adopted: the inconsistency of random matrices is found to be the function of matrix size and the number of missing elements, with a nearly linear dependence in the case of the latter variable. Our results can be directly built into decision-making software and used by practitioners as a statistical criterion for accepting or rejecting an incomplete pairwise comparison matrix.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

The Fundamental Theorem of Barzilai does not hold

The extensively cited work of Barzilai, J. (1997): Deriving weights from pairwise comparison matrices, published in Journal of the Operational Research Society, 48(12), 1226-1232., derives the geometric mean method from two simple axioms. This note reveals that the central result of the paper called the Fundamental Theorem by the author does not hold as there exists at least one further method satisfying both requirements.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

On the monotonicity of the eigenvector method

Pairwise comparisons are used in a wide variety of decision situations where the importance of alternatives should be measured on a numerical scale. One popular method to derive the priorities is based on the right eigenvector of a multiplicative pairwise comparison matrix. We consider two monotonicity axioms in this setting. First, increasing an arbitrary entry of a pairwise comparison matrix is not allowed to result in a counter-intuitive rank reversal, that is, the favoured alternative in the corresponding row cannot be ranked lower than any other alternative if this was not the case before the change (rank monotonicity). Second, the same modification should not decrease the normalised weight of the favoured alternative (weight monotonicity). Both properties are satisfied by the geometric mean method but violated by the eigenvector method. The axioms do not uniquely determine the geometric mean. The relationship between the two monotonicity properties and the Saaty inconsistency index are investigated for the eigenvector method via simulations. Even though their violation turns out not to be a usual problem even for heavily inconsistent matrices, all decision-makers should be informed about the possible occurrence of such unexpected consequences of increasing a matrix entry.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Optimal tournament design: lessons from the men's handball Champions League

Many sports tournaments are organised in a hybrid design consisting of a round-robin group stage followed by a knock-out phase. The traditional seeding regime aims to create balanced groups roughly at the same competition level but may result in several uneven matches when the quality of the teams varies greatly. Our paper is the first challenging this classical solution through the example of the men's EHF (European Handball Federation) Champions League, the most prestigious men's handball club competition in Europe, which has used unbalanced groups between the 2015/16 and 2019/20 seasons. Its particular design is compared to an alternative format with equally strong groups, as well as to the previous scheme of the EHF Champions League. We find that it is possible to increase the quality of all matches played together with raising the uncertainty of outcome, essentially without sacrificing fairness. Our results have useful implications for the governing bodies of major sports.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

The incentive (in)compatibility of group-based qualification systems

Tournament organisers supposedly design rules such that a team cannot be strictly better off by exerting a lower effort. However, the European qualification tournaments for recent FIFA soccer World Cups are known to violate this requirement, which inspires our study on the incentive compatibility of similar group-based qualification systems. Theorems listing the sufficient and necessary conditions of strategy-proofness are provided and applied to classify several soccer qualification tournaments for FIFA World Cups and UEFA European Championships. Two reasonable mechanisms are proposed to solve the problem of incentive incompatibility: the first is based on abolishing the anonymity of the matches discarded in the comparison of teams from different groups, while the second involves a rethinking of the seeding procedure. Our results have useful implications for the governing bodies of major sports.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

The UEFA Champions League seeding is not strategy-proof since the 2015/16 season

Fairness has several interpretations in sports, one of them being that the rules should guarantee incentive compatibility, namely, a team cannot be worse off due to better results in any feasible scenario. The current seeding regime of the most prestigious annual European club football tournament, the UEFA (Union of European Football Associations) Champions League, is shown to violate this requirement since the 2015/16 season. In particular, if the titleholder qualifies for the first pot by being a champion in a high-ranked league, its slot is given to a team from a lower-ranked association, which can harm a top club from the domestic championship of the titleholder. However, filling all vacancies through the national leagues excludes the presence of perverse incentives. UEFA is encouraged to introduce this policy from the 2021-24 cycle onwards.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Two issues of the UEFA Euro 2020 qualifying play-offs

The play-offs of the UEFA Euro 2020 qualifying tournament determine the last four participants in the UEFA European Championship 2020. 16 teams, which have failed to obtain a slot in the qualifying group stage, will be selected and divided into four paths of four teams each based on the inaugural season 2018-19 of the UEFA Nations League. We provide a critical examination of the relevant UEFA regulation and show that its articles contradict each other and allow for an unfair formation of the play-off paths: it might happen that all conditions cannot be satisfied simultaneously and a group winner might face stronger opponents than a non-group winner from the same league despite its better performance in the UEFA Nations League. Simple and straightforward solutions for both problems are suggested.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

University rankings from the revealed preferences of the applicants

A methodology is presented to rank universities on the basis of the lists of programmes the students applied for. We exploit a crucial feature of the centralised assignment system to higher education in Hungary: a student is admitted to the first programme where the score limit is achieved. This makes it possible to derive a partial preference order of each applicant. Our approach integrates the information from all students participating in the system, is free of multicollinearity among the indicators, and contains few ad hoc parameters. The procedure is implemented to rank faculties in the Hungarian higher education between 2001 and 2016. We demonstrate that the ranking given by the least squares method has favourable theoretical properties, is robust with respect to the aggregation of preferences, and performs well in practice. The suggested ranking is worth considering as a reasonable alternative to the standard composite indices.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

When neither team wants to win: a flaw of recent UEFA qualification rules

Tanking, the act of deliberately dropping points or losing a game in order to gain some other advantage, is usually seen as being against the spirit of sports. It can be even more serious if playing a draw is a (weakly) dominant strategy for both teams in a match, since this may lead to collusion. We show that such a situation occurred in a particular football match. As our generalisation reveals, the root of the problem resides in the incentive incompatibility of certain UEFA qualification rules. The governing bodies of major sports should choose strategy-proof tournament designs because of several reasons. First, they may lead to the elimination of a third, innocent team. Second, incentive incompatible rules may discourage both teams from scoring goals, and the players could be interested in improving other match statistics than the number of goals.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

Axiomatizations of inconsistency indices for triads

Pairwise comparison matrices often exhibit inconsistency, therefore many indices have been suggested to measure their deviation from a consistent matrix. A set of axioms has been proposed recently that is required to be satisfied by any reasonable inconsistency index. This set seems to be not exhaustive as illustrated by an example, hence it is expanded by adding two new properties. All axioms are considered on the set of triads, pairwise comparison matrices with three alternatives, which is the simplest case of inconsistency. We choose the logically independent properties and prove that they characterize, that is, uniquely determine the inconsistency ranking induced by most inconsistency indices that coincide on this restricted domain. Since triads play a prominent role in a number of inconsistency indices, our results can also contribute to the measurement of inconsistency for pairwise comparison matrices with more than three alternatives.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

Journal ranking should depend on the level of aggregation

Journal ranking is becoming more important in assessing the quality of academic research. Several indices have been suggested for this purpose, typically on the basis of a citation graph between the journals. We follow an axiomatic approach and find an impossibility theorem: any self-consistent ranking method, which satisfies a natural monotonicity property, should depend on the level of aggregation. Our result presents a trade-off between two axiomatic properties and reveals a dilemma of aggregation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2018arXiv

A characterization of the Logarithmic Least Squares Method

We provide an axiomatic characterization of the Logarithmic Least Squares Method (sometimes called row geometric mean), used for deriving a preference vector from a pairwise comparison matrix. This procedure is shown to be the only one satisfying two properties, correctness in the consistent case, which requires the reproduction of the inducing vector for any consistent matrix, and invariance to a specific transformation on a triad, that is, the weight vector is not influenced by an arbitrary multiplication of matrix elements along a 3-cycle by a positive scalar.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

On the additivity of preference aggregation methods

The paper reviews some axioms of additivity concerning ranking methods used for generalized tournaments with possible missing values and multiple comparisons. It is shown that one of the most natural properties, called consistency, has strong links to independence of irrelevant comparisons, an axiom judged unfavourable when players have different opponents. Therefore some directions of weakening consistency are suggested, and several ranking methods, the score, generalized row sum and least squares as well as fair bets and its two variants (one of them entirely new) are analysed whether they satisfy the properties discussed. It turns out that least squares and generalized row sum with an appropriate parameter choice preserve the relative ranking of two objects if the ranking problems added have the same comparison structure.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access