The "wisdom of crowds" dictates that aggregate predictions from a large crowd can be surprisingly accurate, rivaling predictions by experts. Crowds, meanwhile, are highly heterogeneous in their expertise. In this work, we study how the heterogeneous uncertainty of a crowd can be directly elicited and harnessed to produce more efficient aggregations from a crowd, or provide the same efficiency from smaller crowds. We present and evaluate a novel strategy for eliciting sufficient information about an individual's uncertainty: allow individuals to make multiple simultaneous guesses, and reward them based on the accuracy of their closest guess. We show that our multiple guesses scoring rule is an incentive-compatible elicitation strategy for aggregations across populations under the reasonable technical assumption that the individuals all hold symmetric log-concave belief distributions that come from the same location-scale family. We first show that our multiple guesses scoring rule is strictly proper for a fixed set of quantiles of any log-concave belief distribution. With properly elicited quantiles in hand, we show that when the belief distributions are also symmetric and all belong to a single location-scale family, we can use interquantile ranges to furnish weights for certainty-weighted crowd aggregation. We evaluate our multiple guesses framework empirically through a series of incentivized guessing experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk, and find that certainty-weighted crowd aggregations using multiple guesses outperform aggregations using single guesses without certainty weights.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ugander et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: