Modelling Evolving Voting Behaviour on Internet Platforms - Stochastic Modelling Approaches for Dynamic Voting Systems

Shikhar Raje, Navjyoti Singh, Shobhit Mohan

Abstract

Markov Decision Processes (MDPs) and their variants are standard models in various domains of Artificial Intelligence. However, each model captures a different aspect of real-world phenomena and results in different kinds of computational complexity. Also, MDPs are recently finding use in the scenarios involving aggregation of preferences (such as recommendation systems, e-commerce platforms, etc.). In this paper, we extend one such MDP variant to explore the effect of including observations made by stochastic agents, on the complexity of computing optimal outcomes for voting results. The resulting model captures phenomena of a greater complexity than current models, while being closer to a real world setting. The utility of the theoretical model is demonstrated by application to the real world setting of crowdsourcing. We address a key question in the crowdsourcing domain, namely, the Exploration Vs. Exploitation problem, and demonstrate the flexibility of adaptation of MDP-based models in Dynamic Voting scenarios.

References

  1. Altman, A. and Tennenholtz, M. (2005). Ranking systems: the pagerank axioms. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM conference on Electronic commerce, pages 1-8. ACM.
  2. Amato, C., Konidaris, G. D., and Kaelbling, L. P. (2014). Planning with macro-actions in decentralized pomdps. In Proceedings of the 2014 international conference on Autonomous agents and multi-agent systems, pages 1273-1280. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.
  3. Auer, P., Cesa-Bianchi, N., Freund, Y., and Schapire, R. E. (1995). Gambling in a rigged casino: The adversarial multi-armed bandit problem. In Foundations of Computer Science, 1995. Proceedings., 36th Annual Symposium on, pages 322-331. IEEE.
  4. Dellarocas, C. (2005). Reputation mechanism design in online trading environments with pure moral hazard. Information Systems Research, 16(2):209-230.
  5. Gmytrasiewicz, P. J. and Doshi, P. (2004). Interactive pomdps: Properties and preliminary results. In Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent SystemsVolume 3, pages 1374-1375. IEEE Computer Society.
  6. Gosavi, A. (2014). Simulation-based optimization: parametric optimization techniques and reinforcement learning, volume 55. Springer.
  7. Howard, R. (1960). Dynamic programming and Markov processes. MIT Press.
  8. Kaelbling, L. P., Littman, M. L., and Cassandra, A. R. (1998). Planning and acting in partially observable stochastic domains. Artificial intelligence, 101(1):99- 134.
  9. Kaelbling, L. P., Littman, M. L., and Moore, A. W. (1996). Reinforcement learning: A survey. Journal of artificial intelligence research, pages 237-285.
  10. Lee, D. T., Goel, A., Aitamurto, T., and Landemore, H. (2014). Crowdsourcing for participatory democracies: Efficient elicitation of social choice functions. In Second AAAI Conference on Human Computation and Crowdsourcing.
  11. Mao, A., Procaccia, A. D., and Chen, Y. (2013). Better human computation through principled voting. In AAAI. Citeseer.
  12. Mason, W. and Watts, D. J. (2010). Financial incentives and the performance of crowds. ACM SigKDD Explorations Newsletter, 11(2):100-108.
  13. Moulin, H., Brandt, F., Conitzer, V., Endriss, U., Lang, J., and Procaccia, A. D. (2016). Handbook of Computational Social Choice. Cambridge University Press.
  14. Parkes, D. C. and Procaccia, A. D. (2013). Dynamic social choice with evolving preferences. In AAAI.
  15. Puterman, M. L. (2014). Markov decision processes: discrete stochastic dynamic programming. John Wiley & Sons.
  16. Slivkins, A. and Vaughan, J. W. (2014). Online decision making in crowdsourcing markets: Theoretical challenges. ACM SIGecom Exchanges, 12(2):4-23.
  17. Sondik, E. J. (1971). The optimal control of partially observable markov processes. Technical report, Ph.D Thesis, Stanford University.
  18. Tennenholtz, M. (2004). Dynamic voting. In EC'04: Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, New York, New York, USA, May 17-20, 2004, page 230. Association for Computing Machinery.
  19. Undurti, A. and How, J. P. (2010). An online algorithm for constrained pomdps. In Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2010 IEEE International Conference on, pages 3966-3973. IEEE.
  20. Wiering, M., De Jong, E. D., et al. (2007). Computing optimal stationary policies for multi-objective markov decision processes. In Approximate Dynamic Programming and Reinforcement Learning, 2007. ADPRL 2007. IEEE International Symposium on, pages 158-165. IEEE.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Raje S., Singh N. and Mohan S. (2016). Modelling Evolving Voting Behaviour on Internet Platforms - Stochastic Modelling Approaches for Dynamic Voting Systems . In Proceedings of the 8th International Joint Conference on Computational Intelligence - Volume 1: ECTA, (IJCCI 2016) ISBN 978-989-758-201-1, pages 239-244. DOI: 10.5220/0006073502390244


in Bibtex Style

@conference{ecta16,
author={Shikhar Raje and Navjyoti Singh and Shobhit Mohan},
title={Modelling Evolving Voting Behaviour on Internet Platforms - Stochastic Modelling Approaches for Dynamic Voting Systems},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 8th International Joint Conference on Computational Intelligence - Volume 1: ECTA, (IJCCI 2016)},
year={2016},
pages={239-244},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0006073502390244},
isbn={978-989-758-201-1},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 8th International Joint Conference on Computational Intelligence - Volume 1: ECTA, (IJCCI 2016)
TI - Modelling Evolving Voting Behaviour on Internet Platforms - Stochastic Modelling Approaches for Dynamic Voting Systems
SN - 978-989-758-201-1
AU - Raje S.
AU - Singh N.
AU - Mohan S.
PY - 2016
SP - 239
EP - 244
DO - 10.5220/0006073502390244