MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W318376482 · doi:10.1184/r1/6603437

Analysis and Optimization of Multi-dimensional Percentile Mechanisms

2018· article· en· W318376482 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAuction Theory and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPercentileMathematical optimizationComputer scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)Sample (material)Class (philosophy)Mechanism (biology)Mechanism designValue (mathematics)MathematicsMathematical economicsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the mechanism design problem for agents with single-peaked preferences over multi-dimensional domains when multiple alternatives can be chosen. Facility location and committee selection are classic embodiments of this problem. We propose a class of percentile mechanisms, a form of generalized median mechanisms, that are strategy-proof, and derive worst-case approximation ratios for social cost and maximum load for L1 and L2 cost models. More importantly, we propose a samplebased framework for optimizing the choice of percentiles relative to any prior distribution over preferences, while maintaining strategy-proofness. Our empirical investigations, using social cost and maximum load as objectives, demonstrate the viability of this approach and the value of such optimized mechanisms vis-a-vis ` mechanisms derived through worst-case analysis.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3360.001

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.263 · 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