Research map / Learning theory and algorithms / Prediction and decision losses
A One-Size-Fits-All Approach to Improving Randomness in Paper Assignment
Read the paperCheck your idea against 108,967 papers
AI-extracted summary. Written by AI from the paper's title only (no summary yet). Numbers and claims can be wrong or missing context, so check the paper before you cite or build on it.
Measured effects reported in the paper
| What was changed | Where | Measured | Effect |
|---|---|---|---|
| Use concave perturbed quality instead of linear quality maximization | PLRA paper assignment · AAMAS 2015 | average maximum probability: 0.80 -> 0.74 | Helped |
| Use concave perturbed quality instead of linear quality maximization | PLRA paper assignment · AAMAS 2015 | support size: 2501 -> 28108 | Helped |
| Use concave perturbed quality instead of linear quality maximization | PLRA paper assignment · AAMAS 2015 | entropy: 531.40 -> 1953.55 | Helped |
| Use concave perturbed quality instead of linear quality maximization | PLRA paper assignment · AAMAS 2015 | L2 norm: 37.33 -> 32.33 | Helped |
| Use concave perturbed quality instead of linear quality maximization | PLRA paper assignment · AAMAS 2015 | maximum assignment probability: 0.80 -> 0.80 | No clear effect |
| Use concave perturbed quality instead of linear quality maximization | PLRA paper assignment · ICLR 2018 | maximum assignment probability: 0.90 -> 0.92 | Hurt |
| Use concave perturbed quality instead of linear quality maximization | PLRA paper assignment · ICLR 2018 | average maximum probability: 0.90 -> 0.87 | Helped |
| Use concave perturbed quality instead of linear quality maximization | PLRA paper assignment · ICLR 2018 | support size: 3648 -> 7122 | Helped |
| Use concave perturbed quality instead of linear quality maximization | PLRA paper assignment · ICLR 2018 | entropy: 595.25 -> 1589.95 | Helped |
| Use concave perturbed quality instead of linear quality maximization | PLRA paper assignment · ICLR 2018 | L2 norm: 47.83 -> 42.49 | Helped |
| Use quadratic rather than exponential strictly concave perturbation (ablation) | Perturbed Maximization · AAMAS 2015 and ICLR 2018 | randomness metrics | No clear effect |
| Use the network-flow approximation rather than Gurobi optimization (ablation) | PM-Q and PM-E · AAMAS 2015 | support size: 28108 -> 5849 | Hurt |
Closest papers by meaning
- Mitigating Manipulation in Peer Review via Randomized Reviewer Assignments (NeurIPS 2020 · similarity 0.92)
- A Principled Approach to Randomized Selection under Uncertainty: Applications to Peer Review and Grant Funding (NeurIPS 2025 · similarity 0.85)
- Dissecting Submission Limit in Desk-Rejections: A Mathematical Analysis of Fairness in AI Conference Policies (ICML 2025 · similarity 0.83)
- Eliciting Honest Information from Authors Using Sequential Review (AAAI 2024 · similarity 0.80)
- From Replication to Redesign: Exploring Pairwise Comparisons for LLM-Based Peer Review (NeurIPS 2025 · similarity 0.80)
- Allocate Marginal Reviews to Borderline Papers Using LLM Comparative Ranking (NeurIPS 2026 · similarity 0.79)
Writing a paper in this area? scime draft is a free LaTeX editor with AI included, real-time co-authors and a check of your references and venue rules before you submit. It also imports OpenAI Prism projects.