Loss Functions, Axioms, and Peer Review
It is common to see a handful of reviewers reject a highly novel paper, because they view, say, extensive experiments as far more important than novelty, whereas the community as a whole would have embraced the paper. More generally, the disparate mapping of criteria scores to final recommendations by different reviewers is a major source of inconsistency in peer review. In this paper we present a framework inspired by empirical risk minimization (ERM) for learning the community's aggregate mapping. The key challenge that arises is the specification of a loss function for ERM. We consider the class of $L(p,q)$ loss functions, which is a matrix-extension of the standard class of $L_p$ losses on vectors; here the choice of the loss function amounts to choosing the hyperparameters $p, q \in [1,\infty]$. To deal with the absence of ground truth in our problem, we instead draw on computational social choice to identify desirable values of the hyperparameters $p$ and $q$. Specifically, we characterize $p=q=1$ as the only choice of these hyperparameters that satisfies three natural axiomatic properties. Finally, we implement and apply our approach to reviews from IJCAI 2017.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
No Agreement Without Loss: Learning and Social Choice in Peer Review
In peer review systems, reviewers are often asked to evaluate various features of submissions, such as technical quality or novelty. A score is given to each of the predefined features and based on these the reviewer has…
Least Square Calibration for Peer Review
Peer review systems such as conference paper review often suffer from the issue of miscalibration. Previous works on peer review calibration usually only use the ordinal information or assume simplistic reviewer scoring …
Least Square Calibration for Peer Reviews
Peer review systems such as conference paper review often suffer from the issue of miscalibration. Previous works on peer review calibration usually only use the ordinal information or assume simplistic reviewer scoring …
How to Evaluate Behavioral Models
Researchers building behavioral models, such as behavioral game theorists, use experimental data to evaluate predictive models of human behavior. However, there is little agreement about which loss function should be use…
Peer Loss Functions: Learning from Noisy Labels without Knowing Noise Rates
Learning with noisy labels is a common challenge in supervised learning. Existing approaches often require practitioners to specify noise rates, i.e., a set of parameters controlling the severity of label noises in the p…
Learning with noisy labels