760 likes | 766 Views
This research explores the concept of collective wisdom and the role of diverse interpretations in making accurate predictions. It examines the relationship between generated and interpreted signals and their impact on collective predictions.
E N D
computational aggregation scott e page university of michigan santa fe institute
Evolving Interpretations and the Possibility of Collective Wisdom Jenna Bednar Lu Hong Ken Kollman PJ Lamberson Scott Page Maria Riolo Nathan Seegert
Outline The Wisdom of Crowds - anecdote - undergraduate - graduate Generated vs Interpreted Signals - foundations - statistical properties
Iowa Electronic Markets IEM Prices Obama 0.535 McCain 0.464 Final Gallup Poll Obama 0.55 McCain 0.44 Actual Outcome Obama 0.531 McCain 0.469 Oxford 5-1- 07
Interpreted vs Generated Signals Generated Signal: truth plus a disturbance or interference Interpreted Signal: prediction from a model
Generated Signal noise Outcome Signal
L - L +
Generated Signals Independent Common correlation Common bias Produced in any number by some generating process UCSC
Voting vs Markets Voting: all models get equal weight Markets: models can get differential weight
Signals as Predictions Outcome in N individuals indexed by i Signal received by i: si Vector of signals: s = (s1,s2,…sn ) f(si si | ) = distribution of signals si conditional on . The signals are often assumed to be independent
Measures Squared Error for individual i: SqE(si) = (si - )2 Average Squared Error: SqE(s) = Collective Prediction: c = Collective Squared Error: SqE(c) = (c - )2 Predictive Diversity: PDiv(s) =
Diversity Prediction Theorem SqE(c) = SqE(s) - PDiv(s)
Crowd Error = Average Error - Diversity 0.6 = 2,956.0 - 2955.4
Signals as Random Variables Mean of i’s signal: i() Bias of i’s signal: bi =(i() - ) Variance of i’s signal: vi =E[(i() - )]2 Average Bias B = Average Variance V = Average Covariance C =
Bias Variance DecompositionEnsemble Learning Theory E[SqE(c)] =
Resolving the Paradox Diversity Prediction Theorem: Predictive Diversity is realized diversity, which improves accuracy. Bias Variance Decomposition: Variance corresponds to noisier signals, which reduces accuracy. Negative covariance implies diverse realized diversity and improves expected accuracy of collective predictions.
Large Population Accuracy If the signals are independent, unbiased, and with bounded variance, then as n approaches infinity the crowd’s error goes to zero E[SqE(c)] =
Interpretive Signal model Attributes Prediction
Interpretations Reality consists of many variables or attributes. People cannot include them all. Therefore, we consider only some attributes or lump things together into categories. (Reed, Rosch, Mullinathun, Jackson and Fryer, Collins)
West Virginia • Congressional District • District 1 • District 2 • District 3
West Virginia Slaw available on request Slaw standard on hot dogs Slaw not available No data available
Interpretations: Pile Sort Place the following food items in piles Broccoli Carrots Canned Beets Fresh Salmon Arugula Fennel Spam Ahi Tuna Canned Posole Niman Pork Sea Bass Canned Salmon
BOBO Sort Veggie Organic Canned Broccoli Fresh Salmon Canned Beets Arugula Sea Bass Spam Carrots Niman Pork Canned Salmon Fennel Ahi Tuna Canned Posole
Airstream Sort Veggie Meat/Fish Weird? Broccoli Fresh Salmon Canned Posole Fennel Spam Sea Bass Carrots Niman Pork Arugula Canned Beets Canned Salmon Ahi Tuna
Interpretive Signal model Attributes Prediction
Interpretive Signal Example Charisma Experience H MH ML L H G G G B MH G G G B G ML G B B B L B G B B
Experience Interpretation 75 % Correct H G G G B B G B MH G G G B G B G ML G B B B B L B G B B B
Interpreted Signals Statistical assumptions depend on diversity and sophistication. Independent? Positive correlation and bias result from similar models Amount of potential diversity and sophistication depend on complexity and dimensionality of outcome function
Binary Interpreted Signals Model Set of objects |X|=N Set of outcomes S = {G,B} Interpretation: Ij = {mj,1,mj,2…mj,nj} is a partition of X P(mj,i) = probability mj,i arises
Independent Interpretations P(mji and mkl) = P(mji)P(mkl) Probability j says “i” and k say “el”equals the product of the probability that j says “i” times the probability k says “el”.
Why Independence? We’re interested in independent interpretations because that’s the best people or agents could do in the binary setting. It’s the most diverse two predictions could be. Captures a world in which agents or people look at distinct pieces of information.
Claim: Independent, informative interpreted signals that predict good and bad outcomes with equal likelihood must be negatively correlated in their correctness.
Proof g b G = X B = 1-X G = Y B = 1-Y g b G = W B = 1-W G = Z B = 1-Z Prob row correct: (X+Y+2-(W+Z))/4 Prob column correct: (X+Z+2-(W+Y))/4 Prob both correct: (X+1-W)/4 (X+Y+2-(W+Z))(X+Z+2-(W+Y)) - 4(X+1-W) = (X-W)2 - (Y-Z)2 > 0
Claim: Independent, informative interpreted signals that predict good and bad outcomes with equal likelihood that are correct with probability p exhibit negative correlation equal to Note: p is bounded above by 0.75
The following assumptions are inconsistent with independent interpreted signals States = {G,B} equally likely Signals = {g,b} conditionally independent on the state.
Independent Interpreted Signals Interpreted signal: sj(mji) prediction by j given in set I Interpreted signals are independent iff sj(mji) and sk(mkl) are independent random variables.
Claim: Any outcome function that produces conditionally independent interpreted signals is isomorphic to this example.
! Claim: For signals based on independent interpretations, the difficulty of the outcome function does not alter correlation other than through the accuracy of the interpreted signals
Proof g b g b
Proof g b g b Probability that each is correct and that both are correct is unchanged
Interpretive Signal Example Charisma Experience H MH ML L H G G G B MH G G G B G ML G B B B L B G B B
Experience Interpretation 75 % Correct H G G G B B G B MH G G G B G B G ML G B B B B L B G B B B