MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766386424 · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2019.3447

Efficient Inaccuracy: User-Generated Information Sharing in a Queue

2020· article· en· W2766386424 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

VenueManagement Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAdvanced Queuing Theory Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueueComputer scienceMultilevel queueQueue management systemSocial WelfarePairwise comparisonService (business)Information sharingOperations researchBusinessComputer networkMathematicsMarketingWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study a service system that does not have the capability of monitoring and disclosing its real-time congestion level. However, the customers can observe and post their observations online, and future arrivals can take into account such user-generated information when deciding whether to go to the service facility. We perform pairwise comparisons of the shared, full, and no queue-length information structures in terms of social welfare. Perhaps surprisingly, we show that the shared queue-length information may provide greater social welfare than full queue-length information when the hassle cost of the customers entering the service facility falls into some ranges, and the shared and full queue-length information structures always generate greater social welfare than no queue-length information. Therefore, the discrete disclosure of congestion through user-generated sharing can lead to as much, or even greater, social welfare as the continuous stream of real-time queue-length information disclosure and always generates greater social welfare than no queue-length information disclosure at all. These results imply that a little shared queue-length information—inaccurate and lagged—can go a long way and that it may be more socially beneficial to encourage the sharing of user-generated information among customers than to provide them with full real-time queue-length information. This paper was accepted by Terry Taylor, operations management.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.217 · 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