Paper detail

Optimal Decisions of a Rational Agent in the Presence of Biased Information Providers

We consider information networks whereby multiple biased-information-providers (BIPs), e.g., media outlets/social network users/sensors, share reports of events with rational-information-consumers (RICs). Making the reasonable abstraction that an event can be reported as an answer to a logical statement, we model the input-output behavior of each BIP as a binary channel. For various reasons, some BIPs might share incorrect reports of the event. Moreover, each BIP is: 'biased' if it favors one of the two outcomes while reporting, or 'unbiased' if it favors neither outcome. Such biases occur in information/social networks due to differences in users' characteristics/worldviews. We study the impact of the BIPs' biases on an RIC's choices while deducing the true information. Our work reveals that a "graph-blind" RIC looking for $n$ BIPs among its neighbors, acts peculiarly in order to minimize its probability of making an error while deducing the true information. First, we establish the counter-intuitive fact that the RIC's expected error is minimized by choosing BIPs that are fully-biased against the a-priori likely event. Then, we study the gains that fully-biased BIPs provide over unbiased BIPs when the error rates of their binary channels are equalized, for fair comparison, at some $r>0$. Specifically, the unbiased-to-fully-biased ratio of the RIC's expected error probabilities grows exponentially with the exponent $\frac{n}{2}\ln\left(4ρ_0^2\left(\frac{1}{r}-1\right)\right)$, where $ρ_0$ is the event's prior probability of being $0$. This shows not only that fully-biased BIPs are preferable to unbiased or heterogeneously-biased BIPs, but also that the gains can be substantial for small $r$.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors5 topics

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.