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 functions such as linear functions. In practice, applications like academic conferences often rely on manual methods, such as open discussions, to mitigate miscalibration. It remains an important question to develop algorithms that can handle different types of miscalibrations based on available prior knowledge. In this paper, we propose a flexible framework, namely least square calibration (LSC), for selecting top candidates from peer ratings. Our framework provably performs perfect calibration from noiseless linear scoring functions under mild assumptions, yet also provides competitive calibration results when the scoring function is from broader classes beyond linear functions and with arbitrary noise. On our synthetic dataset, we empirically demonstrate that our algorithm consistently outperforms the baseline which select top papers based on the highest average ratings.
Code (1)
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
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 do Authors' Perceptions of their Papers Compare with Co-authors' Perceptions and Peer-review Decisions?
How do author perceptions match up to the outcomes of the peer-review process and perceptions of others? In a top-tier computer science conference (NeurIPS 2021) with more than 23,000 submitting authors and 9,000 submitt…
On the Privacy-Utility Tradeoff in Peer-Review Data Analysis
A major impediment to research on improving peer review is the unavailability of peer-review data, since any release of such data must grapple with the sensitivity of the peer review data in terms of protecting identitie…
Privacy PreservingCalibrating “Cheap Signals” in Peer Review without a Prior
Peer review lies at the core of the academic process, but even well-intentioned reviewers can still provide noisy ratings. While ranking papers by average ratings may reduce noise, varying noise levels and systematic bia…
The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Review
We conducted an experiment during the review process of the 2023 International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), asking authors with multiple submissions to rank their papers based on perceived quality. In total, we…