High-Effort Crowds: Limited Liability via Tournaments
Yichi Zhang, Grant Schoenebeck
Abstract
We consider the crowdsourcing setting where, in response to the assigned tasks, agents strategically decide both how much effort to exert (from a continuum) and whether to manipulate their reports. The goal is to design payment mechanisms that (1) satisfy limited liability (all payments are non-negative), (2) reduce the principal’s cost of budget, (3) incentivize effort and (4) incentivize truthful responses. In our framework, the payment mechanism composes a performance measurement, which noisily evaluates agents’ effort based on their reports, and a payment function, which converts the scores output by the performance measurement to payments. Previous literature suggests applying a peer prediction mechanism combined with a linear payment function. This method can achieve either (1), (3) and (4), or (2), (3) and (4) in the binary effort setting. In this paper, we suggest using a rank-order payment function (tournament). Assuming Gaussian noise, we analytically optimize the rank-order payment function, and identify a sufficient statistic, sensitivity, which serves as a metric for optimizing the performance measurements. This helps us obtain (1), (2) and (3) simultaneously. Additionally, we show that adding noise to agents’ scores can preserve the truthfulness of the performance measurements under the non-linear tournament, which gives us all four objectives. Our real-data estimated agent-based model experiments show that our method can greatly reduce the payment of effort elicitation while preserving the truthfulness of the performance measurement. In addition, we empirically evaluate several commonly used performance measurements in terms of their sensitivities and strategic robustness.
Ask about this paper
Ask your agent about it.
Lune has read the top-tier papers around this one, so every answer names the papers it rests on.
Your agent calls
Lunesearch_papers
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers get 3bc639e0-c8b7-471a-b482-e99a24f22803Cited by top-tier papers5
- Spot Check Equivalence: An Interpretable Metric for Information Elicitation MechanismsShengwei Xu, Yichi Zhang, Paul Resnick, Grant SchoenebeckWWW 2024 · 7 citations
- Multitask Peer Prediction With Task-dependent StrategiesYichi Zhang, Grant SchoenebeckWWW 2023 · 7 citations
- Carrot and Stick: Eliciting Comparison Data and BeyondYiling Chen, Shi Feng, Fang-Yi YuNeurIPS 2024 · 5 citations
- Evaluating LLM-contaminated Crowdsourcing Data Without Ground TruthYichi Zhang, Jinlong Pang, Zhaowei Zhu, Yang LiuNeurIPS 2025 · 3 citations
- Stochastically Dominant Peer PredictionYichi Zhang, Shengwei Xu, Grant Schoenebeck, David M. PennockNeurIPS 2025 · 2 citations
Related papers
- Information Elicitation from Rowdy CrowdsGrant Schoenebeck, Fang-Yi Yu, Yichi ZhangWWW 2021 · 18 citations
- Truthful Data Acquisition via Peer PredictionYiling Chen, Yiheng Shen, Shuran ZhengNeurIPS 2020 · 35 citations
- Towards Personalized Privacy-Preserving Incentive for Truth Discovery in Crowdsourced Binary-Choice Question AnsweringPeng Sun, Zhibo Wang, Yunhe Feng, Liantao Wu et al.INFOCOM 2020 · 39 citations
- Randomized Pricing with Deferred Acceptance for Revenue Maximization with Submodular ObjectivesHe Huang, Kai Han, Shuang Cui, Jing TangWWW 2023 · 12 citations
- Catch Me if I Can: Detecting Strategic Behaviour in Peer AssessmentIvan Stelmakh, Nihar B. Shah, Aarti SinghAAAI 2021 · 43 citations
