Paper detail

Reliability of decisions based on tests: Fourier analysis of Boolean decision functions

Items in a test are often used as a basis for making decisions and such tests are therefore required to have good psychometric properties, like unidimensionality. In many cases the sum score is used in combination with a threshold to decide between pass or fail, for instance. Here we consider whether such a decision function is appropriate, without a latent variable model, and which properties of a decision function are desirable. We consider reliability (stability) of the decision function, i.e., does the decision change upon perturbations, or changes in a fraction of the outcomes of the items (measurement error). We are concerned with questions of whether the sum score is the best way to aggregate the items, and if so why. We use ideas from test theory, social choice theory, graphical models, computer science and probability theory to answer these questions. We conclude that a weighted sum score has desirable properties that (i) fit with test theory and is observable (similar to a condition like conditional association), (ii) has the property that a decision is stable (reliable), and (iii) satisfies Rousseau's criterion that the input should match the decision. We use Fourier analysis of Boolean functions to investigate whether a decision function is stable and to figure out which (set of) items has proportionally too large an influence on the decision. To apply these techniques we invoke ideas from graphical models and use a pseudo-likelihood factorisation of the probability distribution.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 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.