arXiv subjects

Grant Schoenebeck

Publications and source records attributed to Grant Schoenebeck.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2023

The Wisdom of Strategic Voting

We study the voting game where agents' preferences are endogenously decided by the information they receive, and they can collaborate in a group. We show that strategic voting behaviors have a positive impact on leading to the ``correct'' decision, outperforming the common non-strategic behavior of informative voting and sincere voting. Our results give merit to strategic voting for making good decisions. To this end, we investigate a natural model, where voters' preferences between two alternatives depend on a discrete state variable that is not directly observable. Each voter receives a private signal that is correlated with the state variable. We reveal a surprising equilibrium between a strategy profile being a strong equilibrium and leading to the decision favored by the majority of agents conditioned on them knowing the ground truth (referred to as the informed majority decision): as the size of the vote goes to infinity, every $\varepsilon$-strong Bayes Nash Equilibrium with $\varepsilon$ converging to $0$ formed by strategic agents leads to the informed majority decision with probability converging to $1$. On the other hand, we show that informative voting leads to the informed majority decision only under unbiased instances, and sincere voting leads to the informed majority decision only when it also forms an equilibrium.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2022

False Consensus, Information Theory, and Prediction Markets

We study a setting where Bayesian agents with a common prior have private information related to an event's outcome and sequentially make public announcements relating to their information. Our main result shows that when agents' private information is independent conditioning on the event's outcome whenever agents have similar beliefs about the outcome, their information is aggregated. That is, there is no false consensus. Our main result has a short proof based on a natural information theoretic framework. A key ingredient of the framework is the equivalence between the sign of the ``interaction information'' and a super/sub-additive property of the value of people's information. This provides an intuitive interpretation and an interesting application of the interaction information, which measures the amount of information shared by three random variables. We illustrate the power of this information theoretic framework by reproving two additional results within it: 1) that agents quickly agree when announcing (summaries of) beliefs in round robin fashion [Aaronson 2005]; and 2) results from [Chen et al 2010] on when prediction market agents should release information to maximize their payment. We also interpret the information theoretic framework and the above results in prediction markets by proving that the expected reward of revealing information is the conditional mutual information of the information revealed.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2022

Measurement Integrity in Peer Prediction: A Peer Assessment Case Study

We propose measurement integrity, a property related to ex post reward fairness, as a novel desideratum for peer prediction mechanisms in many natural applications. Like robustness against strategic reporting, the property that has been the primary focus of the peer prediction literature, measurement integrity is an important consideration for understanding the practical performance of peer prediction mechanisms. We perform computational experiments, both with an agent-based model and with real data, to empirically evaluate peer prediction mechanisms according to both of these important properties. Our evaluations simulate the application of peer prediction mechanisms to peer assessment -- a setting in which ex post fairness concerns are particularly salient. We find that peer prediction mechanisms, as proposed in the literature, largely fail to demonstrate significant measurement integrity in our experiments. We also find that theoretical properties concerning robustness against strategic reporting are somewhat noisy predictors of empirical performance. Further, there is an apparent trade-off between our two dimensions of analysis. The best-performing mechanisms in terms of measurement integrity are highly susceptible to strategic reporting. Ultimately, however, we show that supplementing mechanisms with realistic parametric statistical models can, in some cases, improve performance along both dimensions of our analysis and result in mechanisms that strike the best balance between them.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2022

Optimal Local Bayesian Differential Privacy over Markov Chains

In the literature of data privacy, differential privacy is the most popular model. An algorithm is differentially private if its outputs with and without any individual's data are indistinguishable. In this paper, we focus on data generated from a Markov chain and argue that Bayesian differential privacy (BDP) offers more meaningful guarantees in this context. Our main theoretical contribution is providing a mechanism for achieving BDP when data is drawn from a binary Markov chain. We improve on the state-of-the-art BDP mechanism and show that our mechanism provides the optimal noise-privacy tradeoffs for any local mechanism up to negligible factors. We also briefly discuss a non-local mechanism which adds correlated noise. Lastly, we perform experiments on synthetic data that detail when DP is insufficient, and experiments on real data to show that our privacy guarantees are robust to underlying distributions that are not simple Markov chains.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2022

Adaptive Greedy versus Non-adaptive Greedy for Influence Maximization

We consider the *adaptive influence maximization problem*: given a network and a budget $k$, iteratively select $k$ seeds in the network to maximize the expected number of adopters. In the *full-adoption feedback model*, after selecting each seed, the seed-picker observes all the resulting adoptions. In the *myopic feedback model*, the seed-picker only observes whether each neighbor of the chosen seed adopts. Motivated by the extreme success of greedy-based algorithms/heuristics for influence maximization, we propose the concept of *greedy adaptivity gap*, which compares the performance of the adaptive greedy algorithm to its non-adaptive counterpart. Our first result shows that, for submodular influence maximization, the adaptive greedy algorithm can perform up to a $(1-1/e)$-fraction worse than the non-adaptive greedy algorithm, and that this ratio is tight. More specifically, on one side we provide examples where the performance of the adaptive greedy algorithm is only a $(1-1/e)$ fraction of the performance of the non-adaptive greedy algorithm in four settings: for both feedback models and both the *independent cascade model* and the *linear threshold model*. On the other side, we prove that in any submodular cascade, the adaptive greedy algorithm always outputs a $(1-1/e)$-approximation to the expected number of adoptions in the optimal non-adaptive seed choice. Our second result shows that, for the general submodular diffusion model with full-adoption feedback, the adaptive greedy algorithm can outperform the non-adaptive greedy algorithm by an unbounded factor. Finally, we propose a risk-free variant of the adaptive greedy algorithm that always performs no worse than the non-adaptive greedy algorithm.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2021

Bayesian Persuasion in Sequential Trials

We consider a Bayesian persuasion or information design problem where the sender tries to persuade the receiver to take a particular action via a sequence of signals. This we model by considering multi-phase trials with different experiments conducted based on the outcomes of prior experiments. In contrast to most of the literature, we consider the problem with constraints on signals imposed on the sender. This we achieve by fixing some of the experiments in an exogenous manner; these are called determined experiments. This modeling helps us understand real-world situations where this occurs: e.g., multi-phase drug trials where the FDA determines some of the experiments, funding of a startup by a venture capital firm, start-up acquisition by big firms where late-stage assessments are determined by the potential acquirer, multi-round job interviews where the candidates signal initially by presenting their qualifications but the rest of the screening procedures are determined by the interviewer. The non-determined experiments (signals) in the multi-phase trial are to be chosen by the sender in order to persuade the receiver best. With a binary state of the world, we start by deriving the optimal signaling policy in the only non-trivial configuration of a two-phase trial with binary-outcome experiments. We then generalize to multi-phase trials with binary-outcome experiments where the determined experiments can be placed at any chosen node in the trial tree. Here we present a dynamic programming algorithm to derive the optimal signaling policy that uses the two-phase trial solution's structural insights. We also contrast the optimal signaling policy structure with classical Bayesian persuasion strategies to highlight the impact of the signaling constraints on the sender.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2021

Wisdom of the Crowd Voting: Truthful Aggregation of Voter Information and Preferences

We consider two-alternative elections where voters' preferences depend on a state variable that is not directly observable. Each voter receives a private signal that is correlated to the state variable. Voters may be "contingent" with different preferences in different states; or predetermined with the same preference in every state. In this setting, even if every voter is a contingent voter, agents voting according to their private information need not result in the adoption of the universally preferred alternative, because the signals can be systematically biased. We present an easy-to-deploy mechanism that elicits and aggregates the private signals from the voters, and outputs the alternative that is favored by the majority. In particular, voters truthfully reporting their signals forms a strong Bayes Nash equilibrium (where no coalition of voters can deviate and receive a better outcome).

cs.GT↗

arXiv2021

BONUS! Maximizing Surprise

Multi-round competitions often double or triple the points awarded in the final round, calling it a bonus, to maximize spectators' excitement. In a two-player competition with $n$ rounds, we aim to derive the optimal bonus size to maximize the audience's overall expected surprise (as defined in [7]). We model the audience's prior belief over the two players' ability levels as a beta distribution. Using a novel analysis that clarifies and simplifies the computation, we find that the optimal bonus depends greatly upon the prior belief and obtain solutions of various forms for both the case of a finite number of rounds and the asymptotic case. In an interesting special case, we show that the optimal bonus approximately and asymptotically equals to the "expected lead", the number of points the weaker player will need to come back in expectation. Moreover, we observe that priors with a higher skewness lead to a higher optimal bonus size, and in the symmetric case, priors with a higher uncertainty also lead to a higher optimal bonus size. This matches our intuition since a highly asymmetric prior leads to a high "expected lead", and a highly uncertain symmetric prior often leads to a lopsided game, which again benefits from a larger bonus.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2021

SURPRISE! and When to Schedule It

Information flow measures, over the duration of a game, the audience's belief of who will win, and thus can reflect the amount of surprise in a game. To quantify the relationship between information flow and audiences' perceived quality, we conduct a case study where subjects watch one of the world's biggest esports events, LOL S10. In addition to eliciting information flow, we also ask subjects to report their rating for each game. We find that the amount of surprise in the end of the game plays a dominant role in predicting the rating. This suggests the importance of incorporating when the surprise occurs, in addition to the amount of surprise, in perceived quality models. For content providers, it implies that everything else being equal, it is better for twists to be more likely to happen toward the end of a show rather than uniformly throughout.

cs.MA↗

arXiv2021

Timely Information from Prediction Markets

Prediction markets are powerful tools to elicit and aggregate beliefs from strategic agents. However, in current prediction markets, agents may exhaust the social welfare by competing to be the first to update the market. We initiate the study of the trade-off between how quickly information is aggregated by the market, and how much this information costs. We design markets to aggregate timely information from strategic agents to maximize social welfare. To this end, the market must incentivize agents to invest the correct amount of effort to acquire information: quickly enough to be useful, but not faster (and more expensively) than necessary. The market also must ensure that agents report their information truthfully and on time. We consider two settings: in the first, information is only valuable before a deadline; in the second, the value of information decreases as time passes. We use both theorems and simulations to demonstrate the mechanisms.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2020

Relaxing Common Belief for Social Networks

We propose a relaxation of common belief called factional belief that is suitable for the analysis of strategic coordination on social networks. We show how this definition can be used to analyze revolt games on general graphs, including by giving an efficient algorithm that characterizes a structural result about the possible equilibria of such games. This extends prior work on common knowledge and common belief, which has been too restrictive for use in understanding strategic coordination and cooperation in social network settings.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2020

Learning and Strongly Truthful Multi-Task Peer Prediction: A Variational Approach

Peer prediction mechanisms incentivize agents to truthfully report their signals even in the absence of verification by comparing agents' reports with those of their peers. In the detail-free multi-task setting, agents respond to multiple independent and identically distributed tasks, and the mechanism does not know the prior distribution of agents' signals. The goal is to provide an $ε$-strongly truthful mechanism where truth-telling rewards agents "strictly" more than any other strategy profile (with $ε$ additive error), and to do so while requiring as few tasks as possible. We design a family of mechanisms with a scoring function that maps a pair of reports to a score. The mechanism is strongly truthful if the scoring function is "prior ideal," and $ε$-strongly truthful as long as the scoring function is sufficiently close to the ideal one. This reduces the above mechanism design problem to a learning problem -- specifically learning an ideal scoring function. We leverage this reduction to obtain the following three results. 1) We show how to derive good bounds on the number of tasks required for different types of priors. Our reduction applies to myriad continuous signal space settings. This is the first peer-prediction mechanism on continuous signals designed for the multi-task setting. 2) We show how to turn a soft-predictor of an agent's signals (given the other agents' signals) into a mechanism. This allows the practical use of machine learning algorithms that give good results even when many agents provide noisy information. 3) For finite signal spaces, we obtain $ε$-strongly truthful mechanisms on any stochastically relevant prior, which is the maximal possible prior. In contrast, prior work only achieves a weaker notion of truthfulness (informed truthfulness) or requires stronger assumptions on the prior.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2020

Think Globally, Act Locally: On the Optimal Seeding for Nonsubmodular Influence Maximization

We study the $r$-complex contagion influence maximization problem. In the influence maximization problem, one chooses a fixed number of initial seeds in a social network to maximize the spread of their influence. In the $r$-complex contagion model, each uninfected vertex in the network becomes infected if it has at least $r$ infected neighbors. In this paper, we focus on a random graph model named the stochastic hierarchical blockmodel, which is a special case of the well-studied stochastic blockmodel. When the graph is not exceptionally sparse, in particular, when each edge appears with probability $ω(n^{-(1+1/r)})$, under certain mild assumptions, we prove that the optimal seeding strategy is to put all the seeds in a single community. This matches the intuition that in a nonsubmodular cascade model placing seeds near each other creates synergy. However, it sharply contrasts with the intuition for submodular cascade models (e.g., the independent cascade model and the linear threshold model) in which nearby seeds tend to erode each others' effects. Our key technique is a novel time-asynchronized coupling of four cascade processes. Finally, we show that this observation yields a polynomial time dynamic programming algorithm which outputs optimal seeds if each edge appears with a probability either in $ω(n^{-(1+1/r)})$ or in $o(n^{-2})$.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2020

Limitations of Greed: Influence Maximization in Undirected Networks Re-visited

We consider the influence maximization problem (selecting $k$ seeds in a network maximizing the expected total influence) on undirected graphs under the linear threshold model. On the one hand, we prove that the greedy algorithm always achieves a $(1 - (1 - 1/k)^k + Ω(1/k^3))$-approximation, showing that the greedy algorithm does slightly better on undirected graphs than the generic $(1- (1 - 1/k)^k)$ bound which also applies to directed graphs. On the other hand, we show that substantial improvement on this bound is impossible by presenting an example where the greedy algorithm can obtain at most a $(1- (1 - 1/k)^k + O(1/k^{0.2}))$ approximation. This result stands in contrast to the previous work on the independent cascade model. Like the linear threshold model, the greedy algorithm obtains a $(1-(1-1/k)^k)$-approximation on directed graphs in the independent cascade model. However, Khanna and Lucier showed that, in undirected graphs, the greedy algorithm performs substantially better: a $(1-(1-1/k)^k + c)$ approximation for constant $c > 0$. Our results show that, surprisingly, no such improvement occurs in the linear threshold model. Finally, we show that, under the linear threshold model, the approximation ratio $(1 - (1 - 1/k)^k)$ is tight if 1) the graph is directed or 2) the vertices are weighted. In other words, under either of these two settings, the greedy algorithm cannot achieve a $(1 - (1 - 1/k)^k + f(k))$-approximation for any positive function $f(k)$. The result in setting 2) is again in a sharp contrast to Khanna and Lucier's $(1 - (1 - 1/k)^k + c)$-approximation result for the independent cascade model, where the $(1 - (1 - 1/k)^k + c)$ approximation guarantee can be extended to the setting where vertices are weighted. We also discuss extensions to more generalized settings including those with edge-weighted graphs.

cs.DS↗

arXiv2019

Outsourcing Computation: the Minimal Refereed Mechanism

We consider a setting where a verifier with limited computation power delegates a resource intensive computation task---which requires a $T\times S$ computation tableau---to two provers where the provers are rational in that each prover maximizes their own payoff---taking into account losses incurred by the cost of computation. We design a mechanism called the Minimal Refereed Mechanism (MRM) such that if the verifier has $O(\log S + \log T)$ time and $O(\log S + \log T)$ space computation power, then both provers will provide a honest result without the verifier putting any effort to verify the results. The amount of computation required for the provers (and thus the cost) is a multiplicative $\log S$-factor more than the computation itself, making this schema efficient especially for low-space computations.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2019

Beyond Worst-Case (In)approximability of Nonsubmodular Influence Maximization

We consider the problem of maximizing the spread of influence in a social network by choosing a fixed number of initial seeds, formally referred to as the influence maximization problem. It admits a $(1-1/e)$-factor approximation algorithm if the influence function is submodular. Otherwise, in the worst case, the problem is NP-hard to approximate to within a factor of $N^{1-\varepsilon}$. This paper studies whether this worst-case hardness result can be circumvented by making assumptions about either the underlying network topology or the cascade model. All of our assumptions are motivated by many real life social network cascades. First, we present strong inapproximability results for a very restricted class of networks called the (stochastic) hierarchical blockmodel, a special case of the well-studied (stochastic) blockmodel in which relationships between blocks admit a tree structure. We also provide a dynamic-program based polynomial time algorithm which optimally computes a directed variant of the influence maximization problem on hierarchical blockmodel networks. Our algorithm indicates that the inapproximability result is due to the bidirectionality of influence between agent-blocks. Second, we present strong inapproximability results for a class of influence functions that are "almost" submodular, called 2-quasi-submodular. Our inapproximability results hold even for any 2-quasi-submodular $f$ fixed in advance. This result also indicates that the "threshold" between submodularity and nonsubmodularity is sharp, regarding the approximability of influence maximization.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2018

Social Learning with Questions

This work studies sequential social learning (also known as Bayesian observational learning), and how private communication can enable agents to avoid herding to the wrong action/state. Starting from the seminal BHW (Bikhchandani, Hirshleifer, and Welch, 1992) model where asymptotic learning does not occur, we allow agents to ask private and finite questions to a bounded subset of their predecessors. While retaining the publicly observed history of the agents and their Bayes rationality from the BHW model, we further assume that both the ability to ask questions and the questions themselves are common knowledge. Then interpreting asking questions as partitioning information sets, we study whether asymptotic learning can be achieved with finite capacity questions. Restricting our attention to the network where every agent is only allowed to query her immediate predecessor, an explicit construction shows that a 1-bit question from each agent is enough to enable asymptotic learning.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2018

Eliciting Expertise without Verification

A central question of crowd-sourcing is how to elicit expertise from agents. This is even more difficult when answers cannot be directly verified. A key challenge is that sophisticated agents may strategically withhold effort or information when they believe their payoff will be based upon comparison with other agents whose reports will likely omit this information due to lack of effort or expertise. Our work defines a natural model for this setting based on the assumption that \emph{more sophisticated agents know the beliefs of less sophisticated agents}. We then provide a mechanism design framework for this setting. From this framework, we design several novel mechanisms, for both the single and multiple question settings, that (1) encourage agents to invest effort and provide their information honestly; (2) output a correct "hierarchy" of the information when agents are rational.

cs.GT↗