Paper detail

Analysis of Crowdsourced Sampling Strategies for HodgeRank with Sparse Random Graphs

Crowdsourcing platforms are now extensively used for conducting subjective pairwise comparison studies. In this setting, a pairwise comparison dataset is typically gathered via random sampling, either \emph{with} or \emph{without} replacement. In this paper, we use tools from random graph theory to analyze these two random sampling methods for the HodgeRank estimator. Using the Fiedler value of the graph as a measurement for estimator stability (informativeness), we provide a new estimate of the Fiedler value for these two random graph models. In the asymptotic limit as the number of vertices tends to infinity, we prove the validity of the estimate. Based on our findings, for a small number of items to be compared, we recommend a two-stage sampling strategy where a greedy sampling method is used initially and random sampling \emph{without} replacement is used in the second stage. When a large number of items is to be compared, we recommend random sampling with replacement as this is computationally inexpensive and trivially parallelizable. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets support our analysis.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.