Aggregating signals from a collection of noisy sources is a fundamental problem in many domains including crowd-sourcing, multi-agent planning, sensor networks, signal processing, voting, ensemble learning, and federated learning. The core question is how to aggregate signals from multiple sources (e.g. experts) in order to reveal an underlying ground truth. While a full answer depends on the type of signal, correlation of signals, and desired output, a problem common to all of these applications is that of differentiating sources based on their quality and weighting them accordingly. It is often assumed that this differentiation and aggregation is done by a single, accurate central mechanism or agent (e.g. judge). We complicate this model in two ways. First, we investigate the setting with both a single judge, and one with multiple judges. Second, given this multi-agent interaction of judges, we investigate various constraints on the judges' reporting space. We build on known results for the optimal weighting of experts and prove that an ensemble of sub-optimal mechanisms can perform optimally under certain conditions. We then show empirically that the ensemble approximates the performance of the optimal mechanism under a broader range of conditions.
翻译:收集噪音来源的信号是许多领域的一个基本问题,包括众包、多剂规划、传感器网络、信号处理、投票、共同学习和联合学习,核心问题是如何将多种来源(例如专家)的信号汇总起来,以揭示基本事实。虽然全面答案取决于信号的类型、信号的关联性和预期产出,但所有这些应用的共同问题是根据专家的最佳加权和相应加权的不同来源。通常假定这种区分和汇总由一个单一、准确的中央机制或代理人(例如法官)完成。我们以两种方式使这一模式复杂化。首先,我们与一位单一法官和一位多位法官共同调查背景情况。第二,鉴于法官的这种多剂互动,我们调查法官报告空间的各种制约因素。我们以已知的结果为基础,对专家进行最佳加权,并证明在某些条件下,一组次优化机制能够最优化地发挥作用。我们然后从经验上表明,在更广泛的条件下,最优机制的精准性大致表现。