22,063 research outputs found
Fast and Robust Rank Aggregation against Model Misspecification
In rank aggregation, preferences from different users are summarized into a
total order under the homogeneous data assumption. Thus, model misspecification
arises and rank aggregation methods take some noise models into account.
However, they all rely on certain noise model assumptions and cannot handle
agnostic noises in the real world. In this paper, we propose CoarsenRank, which
rectifies the underlying data distribution directly and aligns it to the
homogeneous data assumption without involving any noise model. To this end, we
define a neighborhood of the data distribution over which Bayesian inference of
CoarsenRank is performed, and therefore the resultant posterior enjoys
robustness against model misspecification. Further, we derive a tractable
closed-form solution for CoarsenRank making it computationally efficient.
Experiments on real-world datasets show that CoarsenRank is fast and robust,
achieving consistent improvement over baseline methods
Learning Reputation in an Authorship Network
The problem of searching for experts in a given academic field is hugely
important in both industry and academia. We study exactly this issue with
respect to a database of authors and their publications. The idea is to use
Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI) and Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) to perform
topic modelling in order to find authors who have worked in a query field. We
then construct a coauthorship graph and motivate the use of influence
maximisation and a variety of graph centrality measures to obtain a ranked list
of experts. The ranked lists are further improved using a Markov Chain-based
rank aggregation approach. The complete method is readily scalable to large
datasets. To demonstrate the efficacy of the approach we report on an extensive
set of computational simulations using the Arnetminer dataset. An improvement
in mean average precision is demonstrated over the baseline case of simply
using the order of authors found by the topic models
Matching Natural Language Sentences with Hierarchical Sentence Factorization
Semantic matching of natural language sentences or identifying the
relationship between two sentences is a core research problem underlying many
natural language tasks. Depending on whether training data is available, prior
research has proposed both unsupervised distance-based schemes and supervised
deep learning schemes for sentence matching. However, previous approaches
either omit or fail to fully utilize the ordered, hierarchical, and flexible
structures of language objects, as well as the interactions between them. In
this paper, we propose Hierarchical Sentence Factorization---a technique to
factorize a sentence into a hierarchical representation, with the components at
each different scale reordered into a "predicate-argument" form. The proposed
sentence factorization technique leads to the invention of: 1) a new
unsupervised distance metric which calculates the semantic distance between a
pair of text snippets by solving a penalized optimal transport problem while
preserving the logical relationship of words in the reordered sentences, and 2)
new multi-scale deep learning models for supervised semantic training, based on
factorized sentence hierarchies. We apply our techniques to text-pair
similarity estimation and text-pair relationship classification tasks, based on
multiple datasets such as STSbenchmark, the Microsoft Research paraphrase
identification (MSRP) dataset, the SICK dataset, etc. Extensive experiments
show that the proposed hierarchical sentence factorization can be used to
significantly improve the performance of existing unsupervised distance-based
metrics as well as multiple supervised deep learning models based on the
convolutional neural network (CNN) and long short-term memory (LSTM).Comment: Accepted by WWW 2018, 10 page
Methods for Ordinal Peer Grading
MOOCs have the potential to revolutionize higher education with their wide
outreach and accessibility, but they require instructors to come up with
scalable alternates to traditional student evaluation. Peer grading -- having
students assess each other -- is a promising approach to tackling the problem
of evaluation at scale, since the number of "graders" naturally scales with the
number of students. However, students are not trained in grading, which means
that one cannot expect the same level of grading skills as in traditional
settings. Drawing on broad evidence that ordinal feedback is easier to provide
and more reliable than cardinal feedback, it is therefore desirable to allow
peer graders to make ordinal statements (e.g. "project X is better than project
Y") and not require them to make cardinal statements (e.g. "project X is a
B-"). Thus, in this paper we study the problem of automatically inferring
student grades from ordinal peer feedback, as opposed to existing methods that
require cardinal peer feedback. We formulate the ordinal peer grading problem
as a type of rank aggregation problem, and explore several probabilistic models
under which to estimate student grades and grader reliability. We study the
applicability of these methods using peer grading data collected from a real
class -- with instructor and TA grades as a baseline -- and demonstrate the
efficacy of ordinal feedback techniques in comparison to existing cardinal peer
grading methods. Finally, we compare these peer-grading techniques to
traditional evaluation techniques.Comment: Submitted to KDD 201
- …