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

Roland Maio

Roland Maio contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Data Structures and AlgorithmsComputer Science and Game Theorycs.CYMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
4topics
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

Reviews in motion: a large scale, longitudinal study of review recommendations on Yelp

The United Nations Consumer Protection Guidelines lists "access ... to adequate information ... to make informed choices" as a core consumer protection right. However, problematic online reviews and imperfections in algorithms that detect those reviews pose obstacles to the fulfillment of this right. Research on reviews and review platforms often derives insights from a single web crawl, but the decisions those crawls observe may not be static. A platform may feature a review one day and filter it from view the next day. An appreciation for these dynamics is necessary to understand how a platform chooses which reviews consumers encounter and which reviews may be unhelpful or suspicious. We introduce a novel longitudinal angle to the study of reviews. We focus on "reclassification," wherein a platform changes its filtering decision for a review. To that end, we perform repeated web crawls of Yelp to create three longitudinal datasets. These datasets highlight the platform's dynamic treatment of reviews. We compile over 12.5M reviews--more than 2M unique--across over 10k businesses. Our datasets are available for researchers to use. Our longitudinal approach gives us a unique perspective on Yelp's classifier and allows us to explore reclassification. We find that reviews routinely move between Yelp's two main classifier classes ("Recommended" and "Not Recommended")--up to 8% over eight years--raising concerns about prior works' use of Yelp's classes as ground truth. These changes have impacts on small scales; for example, a business going from a 3.5 to 4.5 star rating despite no new reviews. Some reviews move multiple times: we observed up to five reclassifications in eleven months. Our data suggests demographic disparities in reclassifications, with more changes in lower density and low-middle income areas.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Bridging Machine Learning and Mechanism Design towards Algorithmic Fairness

Decision-making systems increasingly orchestrate our world: how to intervene on the algorithmic components to build fair and equitable systems is therefore a question of utmost importance; one that is substantially complicated by the context-dependent nature of fairness and discrimination. Modern decision-making systems that involve allocating resources or information to people (e.g., school choice, advertising) incorporate machine-learned predictions in their pipelines, raising concerns about potential strategic behavior or constrained allocation, concerns usually tackled in the context of mechanism design. Although both machine learning and mechanism design have developed frameworks for addressing issues of fairness and equity, in some complex decision-making systems, neither framework is individually sufficient. In this paper, we develop the position that building fair decision-making systems requires overcoming these limitations which, we argue, are inherent to each field. Our ultimate objective is to build an encompassing framework that cohesively bridges the individual frameworks of mechanism design and machine learning. We begin to lay the ground work towards this goal by comparing the perspective each discipline takes on fair decision-making, teasing out the lessons each field has taught and can teach the other, and highlighting application domains that require a strong collaboration between these disciplines.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

An efficient sampling algorithm for difficult tree pairs

It is an open question whether there exists a polynomial-time algorithm for computing the rotation distances between pairs of extended ordered binary trees. The problem of computing the rotation distance between an arbitrary pair of trees, (S, T), can be efficiently reduced to the problem of computing the rotation distance between a difficult pair of trees (S', T'), where there is no known first step which is guaranteed to be the beginning of a minimal length path. Of interest, therefore, is how to sample such difficult pairs of trees of a fixed size. We show that it is possible to do so efficiently, and present such an algorithm that runs in time $O(n^4)$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Counting difficult tree pairs with respect to the rotation distance problem

Rotation distance between rooted binary trees is the minimum number of simple rotations needed to transform one tree into the other. Computing the rotation distance between a pair of rooted trees can be quickly reduced in cases where there is a common edge between the trees, or where a single rotation introduces a common edge. Tree pairs which do not have such a reduction are difficult tree pairs, where there is no generally known first step. Here, we describe efforts to count and estimate the number of such difficult tree pairs, and find that the fraction decreases exponentially fast toward zero. We also describe how knowing the number of distinct instances of the rotation distance problem is a helpful factor in making the computations more feasible.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access