{"title":"三个异构Agent回答一个问题的两个强真实机制","authors":"G. Schoenebeck, Fang-Yi Yu","doi":"10.1145/3565560","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Peer prediction mechanisms incentivize self-interested agents to truthfully report their signals even in the absence of verification by comparing agents’ reports with their peers. We propose two new mechanisms, Source and Target Differential Peer Prediction, and prove very strong guarantees for a very general setting. Our Differential Peer Prediction mechanisms are strongly truthful: Truth-telling is a strict Bayesian Nash equilibrium. Also, truth-telling pays strictly higher than any other equilibria, excluding permutation equilibria, which pays the same amount as truth-telling. The guarantees hold for asymmetric priors among agents, which the mechanisms need not know (detail-free) in the single question setting. Moreover, they only require three agents, each of which submits a single item report: two report their signals (answers), and the other reports her forecast (prediction of one of the other agent’s reports). Our proof technique is straightforward, conceptually motivated, and turns on the logarithmic scoring rule’s special properties. Moreover, we can recast the Bayesian Truth Serum mechanism [20] into our framework. We can also extend our results to the setting of continuous signals with a slightly weaker guarantee on the optimality of the truthful equilibrium.","PeriodicalId":42216,"journal":{"name":"ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation","volume":"10 1","pages":"1 - 26"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Two Strongly Truthful Mechanisms for Three Heterogeneous Agents Answering One Question\",\"authors\":\"G. Schoenebeck, Fang-Yi Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3565560\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Peer prediction mechanisms incentivize self-interested agents to truthfully report their signals even in the absence of verification by comparing agents’ reports with their peers. We propose two new mechanisms, Source and Target Differential Peer Prediction, and prove very strong guarantees for a very general setting. Our Differential Peer Prediction mechanisms are strongly truthful: Truth-telling is a strict Bayesian Nash equilibrium. Also, truth-telling pays strictly higher than any other equilibria, excluding permutation equilibria, which pays the same amount as truth-telling. The guarantees hold for asymmetric priors among agents, which the mechanisms need not know (detail-free) in the single question setting. Moreover, they only require three agents, each of which submits a single item report: two report their signals (answers), and the other reports her forecast (prediction of one of the other agent’s reports). Our proof technique is straightforward, conceptually motivated, and turns on the logarithmic scoring rule’s special properties. Moreover, we can recast the Bayesian Truth Serum mechanism [20] into our framework. We can also extend our results to the setting of continuous signals with a slightly weaker guarantee on the optimality of the truthful equilibrium.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42216,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 26\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3565560\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3565560","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Two Strongly Truthful Mechanisms for Three Heterogeneous Agents Answering One Question
Peer prediction mechanisms incentivize self-interested agents to truthfully report their signals even in the absence of verification by comparing agents’ reports with their peers. We propose two new mechanisms, Source and Target Differential Peer Prediction, and prove very strong guarantees for a very general setting. Our Differential Peer Prediction mechanisms are strongly truthful: Truth-telling is a strict Bayesian Nash equilibrium. Also, truth-telling pays strictly higher than any other equilibria, excluding permutation equilibria, which pays the same amount as truth-telling. The guarantees hold for asymmetric priors among agents, which the mechanisms need not know (detail-free) in the single question setting. Moreover, they only require three agents, each of which submits a single item report: two report their signals (answers), and the other reports her forecast (prediction of one of the other agent’s reports). Our proof technique is straightforward, conceptually motivated, and turns on the logarithmic scoring rule’s special properties. Moreover, we can recast the Bayesian Truth Serum mechanism [20] into our framework. We can also extend our results to the setting of continuous signals with a slightly weaker guarantee on the optimality of the truthful equilibrium.
期刊介绍:
The ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation welcomes submissions of the highest quality that concern the intersection of computer science and economics. Of interest to the journal is any topic relevant to both economists and computer scientists, including but not limited to the following: Agents in networks Algorithmic game theory Computation of equilibria Computational social choice Cost of strategic behavior and cost of decentralization ("price of anarchy") Design and analysis of electronic markets Economics of computational advertising Electronic commerce Learning in games and markets Mechanism design Paid search auctions Privacy Recommendation / reputation / trust systems Systems resilient against malicious agents.