Paper detail

Exploiting Meta-Cognitive Features for a Machine-Learning-Based One-Shot Group-Decision Aggregation

The outcome of a collective decision-making process, such as crowdsourcing, often relies on the procedure through which the perspectives of its individual members are aggregated. Popular aggregation methods, such as the majority rule, often fail to produce the optimal result, especially in high-complexity tasks. Methods that rely on meta-cognitive information, such as confidence-based methods and the Surprisingly Popular Option, had shown an improvement in various tasks. However, there is still a significant number of cases with no optimal solution. Our aim is to exploit meta-cognitive information and to learn from it, for the purpose of enhancing the ability of the group to produce a correct answer. Specifically, we propose two different feature-representation approaches: (1) Response-Centered feature Representation (RCR), which focuses on the characteristics of the individual response instances, and (2) Answer-Centered feature Representation (ACR), which focuses on the characteristics of each of the potential answers. Using these two feature-representation approaches, we train Machine-Learning (ML) models, for the purpose of predicting the correctness of a response and of an answer. The trained models are used as the basis of an ML-based aggregation methodology that, contrary to other ML-based techniques, has the advantage of being a "one-shot" technique, independent from the crowd-specific composition and personal record, and adaptive to various types of situations. To evaluate our methodology, we collected 2490 responses for different tasks, which we used for feature engineering and for the training of ML models. We tested our feature-representation approaches through the performance of our proposed ML-based aggregation methods. The results show an increase of 20% to 35% in the success rate, compared to the use of standard rule-based aggregation methods.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.