MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294792572 · doi:10.5555/2615731.2615843

Empathetic social choice on social networks

2014· article· en· W2294792572 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOpinion Dynamics and Social Influence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial choice theoryVotingComputer scienceMaximizationPreferenceSocial preferencesScalabilitySocial network (sociolinguistics)Task (project management)Value (mathematics)Social WelfareMicroeconomicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningEconomicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social and economic networks play a fundamental role in facilitating interactions and behaviors between individuals, businesses, and organizations. It is widely recog-nized that such networks can correlate behaviors (and arguably preferences) among connected agents. We introduce a model for social choice—specifically, consensus decision making—on such networks that reflects certain interdependencies among agent utilities. Specifically, we define an empathetic social choice framework in which agents derive utility based on both their own intrinsic preferences and the satisfac-tion of their neighbors. We show how this problem translates into a weighted form of classical preference aggregation (e.g., social welfare maximization or certain forms of voting), and develop effective algorithms for consensus decision making that we believe should scale to large-scale (online) social or economic networks. Preliminary experiments validate the effectiveness of our proposed algorithms. 1

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOpinion Dynamics and Social InfluenceFrench-language works237,207