MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409365296 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v39i13.33504

Eliminating Majority Illusion Is Easy

2025· article· en· W4409365296 on OpenAlexafffund
Jack Dippel, Max Dupré la Tour, April Niu, Sanjukta Roy, Adrian Vetta

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIllusionComputer sciencePsychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Majority illusion is a phenomenon in social networks wherein the decision by the majority of the network is not the same as one's personal social circle's majority, leading to an incorrect perception of the majority in a large network. We present polynomial-time algorithms which completely eliminate majority illusion by altering as few connections in the network as possible. Eliminating majority illusion ensures each neighbourhood in the network has at least a 1/2-fraction of the majority winner. This result is surprising as partially eliminating majority illusion is NP-hard. We generalize the majority illusion problem to an arbitrary fraction p and show that the problem of ensuring all neighbourhoods in the network contain at least a p-fraction of nodes consistent with a given preference is NP-hard, for nearly all values of p.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicConstraint Satisfaction and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207