BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Yuqing Kong

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

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Computer Science and Game TheoryComputer VisionCryptography and SecurityMachine LearningSocial and Information Networks

Catalog footprint

What is connected

6works
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

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

6 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Modularity and Mutual Information in Networks: Two Sides of the Same Coin

Modularity, first proposed by [Newman and Girvan, 2004], is one of the most popular ways to quantify the significance of community structure in complex networks. It can serve as both a standard benchmark to compare different community detection algorithms, and an optimization objective to detect communities itself. Previous work on modularity has developed many efficient algorithms for modularity maximization. However, few of researchers considered the interpretation of the modularity function itself. In this paper, we study modularity from an information-theoretical perspective and show that modularity and mutual information in networks are essentially the same. The main contribution is that we develop a family of generalized modularity measures, f-modularity based on f-mutual information. f-Modularity has an information-theoretical interpretation, enjoys the desired properties of mutual information measure, and provides an approach to estimate the mutual information between discrete random variables. At a high level, we show the significance of community structure is equivalent to the amount of information contained in the network. The connection of f-modularity and f-mutual information bridges two important fields, complex network and information theory and also sheds light on the design of measures on community structure in future.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Equal Affection or Random Selection: the Quality of Subjective Feedback from a Group Perspective

In the setting where a group of agents is asked a single subjective multi-choice question (e.g. which one do you prefer? cat or dog?), we are interested in evaluating the quality of the collected feedback. However, the collected statistics are not sufficient to reflect how informative the feedback is since fully informative feedback (equal affection of the choices) and fully uninformative feedback (random selection) have the same uniform statistics. Here we distinguish the above two scenarios by additionally asking for respondents' predictions about others' choices. We assume that informative respondents' predictions strongly depend on their own choices while uninformative respondents' do not. With this assumption, we propose a new definition for uninformative feedback and correspondingly design a family of evaluation metrics, called f-variety, for group-level feedback which can 1) distinguish informative feedback and uninformative feedback (separation) even if their statistics are both uniform and 2) decrease as the ratio of uninformative respondents increases (monotonicity). We validate our approach both theoretically and numerically. Moreover, we conduct two real-world case studies about 1) comparisons about athletes and 2) comparisons about stand-up comedians to show the superiority of our approach.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

TCGM: An Information-Theoretic Framework for Semi-Supervised Multi-Modality Learning

Fusing data from multiple modalities provides more information to train machine learning systems. However, it is prohibitively expensive and time-consuming to label each modality with a large amount of data, which leads to a crucial problem of semi-supervised multi-modal learning. Existing methods suffer from either ineffective fusion across modalities or lack of theoretical guarantees under proper assumptions. In this paper, we propose a novel information-theoretic approach, namely \textbf{T}otal \textbf{C}orrelation \textbf{G}ain \textbf{M}aximization (TCGM), for semi-supervised multi-modal learning, which is endowed with promising properties: (i) it can utilize effectively the information across different modalities of unlabeled data points to facilitate training classifiers of each modality (ii) it has theoretical guarantee to identify Bayesian classifiers, i.e., the ground truth posteriors of all modalities. Specifically, by maximizing TC-induced loss (namely TC gain) over classifiers of all modalities, these classifiers can cooperatively discover the equivalent class of ground-truth classifiers; and identify the unique ones by leveraging limited percentage of labeled data. We apply our method to various tasks and achieve state-of-the-art results, including news classification, emotion recognition and disease prediction.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

Outsourcing Computation: the Minimal Refereed Mechanism

We consider a setting where a verifier with limited computation power delegates a resource intensive computation task---which requires a $T\times S$ computation tableau---to two provers where the provers are rational in that each prover maximizes their own payoff---taking into account losses incurred by the cost of computation. We design a mechanism called the Minimal Refereed Mechanism (MRM) such that if the verifier has $O(\log S + \log T)$ time and $O(\log S + \log T)$ space computation power, then both provers will provide a honest result without the verifier putting any effort to verify the results. The amount of computation required for the provers (and thus the cost) is a multiplicative $\log S$-factor more than the computation itself, making this schema efficient especially for low-space computations.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Equilibrium Selection in Information Elicitation without Verification via Information Monotonicity

Peer-prediction is a mechanism which elicits privately-held, non-variable information from self-interested agents---formally, truth-telling is a strict Bayes Nash equilibrium of the mechanism. The original Peer-prediction mechanism suffers from two main limitations: (1) the mechanism must know the "common prior" of agents' signals; (2) additional undesirable and non-truthful equilibria exist which often have a greater expected payoff than the truth-telling equilibrium. A series of results has successfully weakened the known common prior assumption. However, the equilibrium multiplicity issue remains a challenge. In this paper, we address the above two problems. In the setting where a common prior exists but is not known to the mechanism we show (1) a general negative result applying to a large class of mechanisms showing truth-telling can never pay strictly more in expectation than a particular set of equilibria where agents collude to "relabel" the signals and tell the truth after relabeling signals; (2) provide a mechanism that has no information about the common prior but where truth-telling pays as much in expectation as any relabeling equilibrium and pays strictly more than any other symmetric equilibrium; (3) moreover in our mechanism, if the number of agents is sufficiently large, truth-telling pays similarly to any equilibrium close to a "relabeling" equilibrium and pays strictly more than any equilibrium that is not close to a relabeling equilibrium.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Putting Peer Prediction Under the Micro(economic)scope and Making Truth-telling Focal

Peer-prediction is a (meta-)mechanism which, given any proper scoring rule, produces a mechanism to elicit privately-held, non-verifiable information from self-interested agents. Formally, truth-telling is a strict Nash equilibrium of the mechanism. Unfortunately, there may be other equilibria as well (including uninformative equilibria where all players simply report the same fixed signal, regardless of their true signal) and, typically, the truth-telling equilibrium does not have the highest expected payoff. The main result of this paper is to show that, in the symmetric binary setting, by tweaking peer-prediction, in part by carefully selecting the proper scoring rule it is based on, we can make the truth-telling equilibrium focal---that is, truth-telling has higher expected payoff than any other equilibrium. Along the way, we prove the following: in the setting where agents receive binary signals we 1) classify all equilibria of the peer-prediction mechanism; 2) introduce a new technical tool for understanding scoring rules, which allows us to make truth-telling pay better than any other informative equilibrium; 3) leverage this tool to provide an optimal version of the previous result; that is, we optimize the gap between the expected payoff of truth-telling and other informative equilibria; and 4) show that with a slight modification to the peer prediction framework, we can, in general, make the truth-telling equilibrium focal---that is, truth-telling pays more than any other equilibrium (including the uninformative equilibria).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access