skip to main content
10.1145/2764468.2764529acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesecConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The Wisdom of Multiple Guesses

Published:15 June 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

The "wisdom of crowds" dictates that aggregate predictions from a large crowd can be surprisingly accurate, rivaling predictions by experts. Crowds, meanwhile, are highly heterogeneous in their expertise. In this work, we study how the heterogeneous uncertainty of a crowd can be directly elicited and harnessed to produce more efficient aggregations from a crowd, or provide the same efficiency from smaller crowds. We present and evaluate a novel strategy for eliciting sufficient information about an individual's uncertainty: allow individuals to make multiple simultaneous guesses, and reward them based on the accuracy of their closest guess. We show that our multiple guesses scoring rule is an incentive-compatible elicitation strategy for aggregations across populations under the reasonable technical assumption that the individuals all hold symmetric log-concave belief distributions that come from the same location-scale family. We first show that our multiple guesses scoring rule is strictly proper for a fixed set of quantiles of any log-concave belief distribution. With properly elicited quantiles in hand, we show that when the belief distributions are also symmetric and all belong to a single location-scale family, we can use interquantile ranges to furnish weights for certainty-weighted crowd aggregation. We evaluate our multiple guesses framework empirically through a series of incentivized guessing experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk, and find that certainty-weighted crowd aggregations using multiple guesses outperform aggregations using single guesses without certainty weights.

References

  1. Glenn Brier. 1950. Verification of forecasts expressed in terms of probability. Monthly Weather Rev 78, 1 (1950), 1--3.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. David Budescu and Eva Chen. 2014. Expertise to Extract the Wisdom of Crowds. Management Science (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Pierre Cohort. 2000. Sur quelques problemes de quantification. Ph.D. Dissertation. Univ. Paris 6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Richard Courant. 1950. Dirichlet's principle, conformal mapping, and minimal surfaces. Vol. 3. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Tore Dalenius. 1950. The Problem of Optimum Stratification. Scand Actuarial J 1950, 3--4 (1950), 203--213.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Abhimanyu Das, Sreenivas Gollapudi, Rina Panigrahy, and Mahyar Salek. 2013. Debiasing social wisdom. In KDD. ACM, 500--508. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Clintin P Davis-Stober, David V Budescu, Jason Dana, and Stephen B Broomell. 2014. When is a crowd wise? Decision 1, 2 (2014), 79.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Pierre Simon de Laplace. 1820. Théorie analytique des probabilités. Courcier.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Ofer Dekel and Ohad Shamir. 2009. Vox populi: Collecting high-quality labels from a crowd. In COLT.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Sylvain Delattre, Siegfried Graf, Harald Luschgy, Gilles Pages, and others. 2004. Quantization of probability distributions under norm-based distortion measures. Statistics and Decisions 22 (2004), 261--282.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Sándor P Fekete, Joseph SB Mitchell, and Karin Beurer. 2005. On the continuous Fermat-Weber problem. Operations Research 53, 1 (2005), 61--76. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. P Fleischer. 1964. Sufficient conditions for achieving minimum distortion in a quantizer. IEEE Int. Conv. Rec 12 (1964), 104--111.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Jean-Claude Fort and Gilles Pagès. Asymptotics of optimal quantizers for some scalar distributions. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 146, 2 (2002), 253--275. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Rafael M Frongillo, Yiling Chen, and Ian A Kash. 2015. Elicitation for Aggregation. In AAAI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Francis Galton. 1907a. One vote, one value. Nature 75 (1907), 414.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Francis Galton. 1907b. Vox populi. Nature 75 (1907), 450.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Tilmann Gneiting and Adrian E Raftery. 2007. Strictly proper scoring rules, prediction, and estimation. JASA 102, 477 (2007), 359--378.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Daniel Goldstein, R Preston McAfee, and Siddharth Suri. 2014. The Wisdom of Smaller, Smarter Crowds. In EC. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Daniel G Goldstein and David Rothschild. 2014. Lay understanding of probability distributions. Judgment and Decision Making 9, 1 (2014), 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Cecil Hastings, Frederick Mosteller, John W Tukey, and Charles P Winsor. 1947. Low moments for small samples: a comparative study of order statistics. Annals of Mathematical Statistics (1947), 413--426.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Stefan M Herzog and Ralph Hertwig. 2009. The wisdom of many in one mind improving individual judgments with dialectical bootstrapping. Psychological Science 20, 2 (2009), 231--237.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Stefan M Herzog and Ralph Hertwig. 2013. The Crowd Within and the Benefits of Dialectical Bootstrapping A Reply to White and Antonakis (2013). Psychological Science 24, 1 (2013), 117--119.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. John J Horton. 2010. The Dot-Guessing Game: A "Fruit Fly" for Human Computation Research. SSRN 1600372 (2010).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Harold Hotelling. 1929. Stability in Competition. The Economic Journal 39, 153 (1929), 41--57.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Victor Richmond R Jose, Yael Grushka-Cockayne, and Kenneth C Lichtendahl Jr. 2013. Trimmed opinion pools and the crowd's calibration problem. Management Science 60, 2 (2013), 463--475. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Ece Kamar and Eric Horvitz. 2012. Incentives and truthful reporting in consensus-centric crowdsourcing. Technical Report. MSR-TR-2012--16, Microsoft Research.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Gideon Keren. 1991. Calibration and probability judgements: Conceptual and methodological issues. Acta Psychologica 77, 3 (1991), 217--273.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. John Kieffer. 1983. Uniqueness of locally optimal quantizer for log-concave density and convex error weighting function. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 29, 1 (1983), 42--47. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Nicolas S Lambert, David M Pennock, and Yoav Shoham. 2008. Eliciting properties of probability distributions. In EC. ACM, 129--138. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Kenneth C Lichtendahl Jr, Yael Grushka-Cockayne, and Phillip E Pfeifer. 2013. The Wisdom of Competitive Crowds. Operations Research 61, 6 (2013), 1383--1398. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Stuart Lloyd. 1982. Least squares quantization in PCM. IEEE Trans on Inf Theory 28, 2 (1982), 129--137. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Jan Lorenz, Heiko Rauhut, Frank Schweitzer, and Dirk Helbing. 2011. How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect. PNAS 108, 22 (2011), 9020--9025.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Irving Lorge, David Fox, Joel Davitz, and Marlin Brenner. 1958. A survey of studies contrasting the quality of group performance and individual performance, 1920--1957. Psychological bulletin 55, 6 (1958), 337.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. David Mease, Vijayan N Nair, and Agus Sudjianto. 2004. Selective assembly in manufacturing: statistical issues and optimal binning strategies. Technometrics 46, 2 (2004), 165--175.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Anthony Mendes and Kent E Morrison. 2014. Guessing games. AMM 121, 1 (2014), 33--44.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Theo Offerman, Joep Sonnemans, Gijs Van de Kuilen, and Peter Wakker. 2009. A truth serum for non-bayesians: Correcting proper scoring rules for risk attitudes. The Review of Economic Studies 76, 4 (2009), 1461--1489.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Martin J Osborne and Carolyn Pitchik. 1986. The nature of equilibrium in a location model. International Economic Review 27, 1 (1986), 223--37.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Marco Ottaviani and Peter Norman Sørensen. 2006. The strategy of professional forecasting. Journal of Financial Economics 81, 2 (2006), 441--466.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. DraĚen Prelec. 2004. A Bayesian truth serum for subjective data. Science 306, 5695 (2004), 462--466.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Leonard J Savage. 1971. Elicitation of personal probabilities and expectations. JASA 66 (1971), 783--801.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Nihar B Shah and Dengyong Zhou. 2014. Double or Nothing: Multiplicative Incentive Mechanisms for Crowdsourcing. arXiv preprint arXiv:1408.1387 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. David B Shmoys, Éva Tardos, and Karen Aardal. 1997. Approximation algorithms for facility location problems. In STOC. ACM, 265--274. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Herbert A Simon. 1972. Theories of bounded rationality. Decision and organization 1 (1972), 161--176.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. James Surowiecki. 2005. The wisdom of crowds. Random House LLC. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. A Trushkin. 1982. Sufficient conditions for uniqueness of a locally optimal quantizer for a class of convex error weighting functions. IEEE Trans. on Information Theory 28, 2 (1982), 187--198. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. John W Tukey. 1960. A survey of sampling from contaminated distributions. Contributions to probability and statistics 39 (1960), 448--485.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Edward Vul and Harold Pashler. 2008. Measuring the crowd within probabilistic representations within individuals. Psychological Science 19, 7 (2008), 645--647.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Thomas S Wallsten, David Budescu, Ido Erev, and Adele Diederich. 1997. Evaluating and combining subjective probability estimates. J Behavioral Decision Making 10, 3 (1997), 243--268.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Chris M White and John Antonakis. 2013. Quantifying Accuracy Improvement in Sets of Pooled Judgments Does Dialectical Bootstrapping Work? Psychological science 24, 1 (2013), 115--116.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. The Wisdom of Multiple Guesses

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      EC '15: Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation
      June 2015
      852 pages
      ISBN:9781450334105
      DOI:10.1145/2764468

      Copyright © 2015 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 15 June 2015

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      EC '15 Paper Acceptance Rate72of220submissions,33%Overall Acceptance Rate664of2,389submissions,28%

      Upcoming Conference

      EC '24
      The 25th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation
      July 8 - 11, 2024
      New Haven , CT , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader