I consider a setting where reviewers offer very noisy scores for several items for the selection of high-quality ones (e.g., peer review of large conference proceedings), whereas the owner of these items knows the true underlying scores but prefers not to provide this information. To address this withholding of information, in this paper, I introduce the Isotonic Mechanism, a simple and efficient approach to improving imprecise raw scores by leveraging certain information that the owner is incentivized to provide. This mechanism takes the ranking of the items from best to worst provided by the owner as input, in addition to the raw scores provided by the reviewers. It reports the adjusted scores for the items by solving a convex optimization problem. Under certain conditions, I show that the owner's optimal strategy is to honestly report the true ranking of the items to her best knowledge in order to maximize the expected utility. Moreover, I prove that the adjusted scores provided by this owner-assisted mechanism are significantly more accurate than the raw scores provided by the reviewers. This paper concludes with several extensions of the Isotonic Mechanism and some refinements of the mechanism for practical consideration.
翻译:我认为,在这样一个环境下,审评员为选择高质量项目提供非常吵闹的分数,(例如,对大型会议程序的同行审查),而这些项目的拥有者知道真正的基本分数,但不愿提供这一信息。为了解决这种不提供信息的问题,我在本文件中介绍了 " 同位素机制 ",这是一种简单而有效的方法,通过利用拥有者受到激励提供的某些信息来改进不准确的原始分数。这一机制除审查员提供的原始分数外,还把所有者提供的最佳分数列为投入,并报告项目经调整的分数,方法是解决混凝土优化问题。在某些情况下,我表明,所有者的最佳战略是诚实地向她的最佳知识报告项目的真实分数,以便最大限度地发挥预期的效用。此外,我证明,这一所有者协助机制提供的经调整的分数比审评员提供的原始分数要准确得多。本文件最后几次延长了 " 同位素机制 ",并对实际审议机制作了一些改进。