Rank Aggregation and Belief Revision Dynamics
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this paper we compare several popular rank aggregation methods by accuracy of finding the true (correct) ranked list. Our research reveals that under most common circumstances simple methods such as the average or majority actually tend to outperform computationally-intensive distance-based methods. We then conduct a study to compare how actual people aggregate ranks in a group setting. Our finding is that individuals tend to adopt the group mean in a third of all revisions, making it the most popular strategy for belief revision.
منابع مشابه
Belief Merging versus Judgment Aggregation
The problem of aggregating pieces of propositional information coming from several agents has given rise to an intense research activity. Two distinct theories have emerged. On the one hand, belief merging has been considered in AI as an extension of belief revision. On the other hand, judgment aggregation has been developed in political philosophy and social choice theory. Judgment aggregation...
متن کاملType-theoretical Dynamics Exploring Belief Revision in a constructive framework
In the present paper a dynamics for type theory is introduced. The formalization provides epistemic explanations for the basic notions of belief state and belief set by referring to assertion conditions for type-theoretical judgements; it interprets expectations in terms of default assumptions for such a structure and it adapts the usual revision operations and the analogous of the Ramsey test....
متن کاملTowards a "Sophisticated" Model of Belief Dynamics. Part II: Belief Revision
In the companion paper (Towards a “sophisticated” model of belief dynamics. Part I), a general framework for realistic modelling of instantaneous states of belief and of the operations involving them was presented and motivated. In this paper, the framework is applied to the case of belief revision. A model of belief revision shall be obtained which, firstly, recovers the Gärdenfors postulates ...
متن کاملInduced aggregation operators in decision making with the Dempster-Shafer belief structure
In this study, we analyze the induced aggregation operators. The analysis begins with a revision of some basic concepts such as the induced ordered weighted averaging operator and the induced ordered weighted geometric operator. We then analyze the problem of decision making with Dempster-Shafer (D-S) theory of evidence. We suggest the use of induced aggregation operators in decision making wit...
متن کاملAggregating Judgements by Merging Evidence
The theory of belief revision and merging has recently been applied to judgement aggregation. In this paper I argue that judgements are best aggregated by merging the evidence on which they are based, rather than by directly merging the judgements themselves. This leads to a threestep strategy for judgement aggregation. First, merge the evidence bases of the various agents using some method of ...
متن کامل