Multitask Peer Prediction With Task-dependent Strategies
Yichi Zhang, Grant Schoenebeck
Abstract
Peer prediction aims to incentivize truthful reports from agents whose reports cannot be assessed with any objective ground truthful information. In the multi-task setting where each agent is asked multiple questions, a sequence of mechanisms have been proposed which are truthful — truth-telling is guaranteed to be an equilibrium, or even better, informed truthful — truth-telling is guaranteed to be one of the best-paid equilibria. However, these guarantees assume agents’ strategies are restricted to be task-independent: an agent’s report on a task is not affected by her information about other tasks. We provide the first discussion on how to design (informed) truthful mechanisms for task-dependent strategies, which allows the agents to report based on all her information on the assigned tasks. We call such stronger mechanisms (informed) omni-truthful. In particular, we propose the joint-disjoint task framework, a new paradigm which builds upon the previous penalty-bonus task framework. First, we show a natural reduction from mechanisms in the penalty-bonus task framework to mechanisms in the joint-disjoint task framework that maps every truthful mechanism to an omni-truthful mechanism. Such a reduction is non-trivial as we show that current penalty-bonus task mechanisms are not, in general, omni-truthful. Second, for a stronger truthful guarantee, we design the matching agreement (MA) mechanism which is informed omni-truthful. Finally, for the MA mechanism in the detail-free setting where no prior knowledge is assumed, we show how many tasks are required to (approximately) retain the truthful guarantees.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 9d95fac0-ad11-4114-9701-5d6258330ef9Cited by top-tier papers4
- Spot Check Equivalence: An Interpretable Metric for Information Elicitation MechanismsShengwei Xu, Yichi Zhang, Paul Resnick, Grant SchoenebeckWWW 2024 · 7 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
- Strong Equilibria in Bayesian Games with Bounded Group SizeQishen Han, Grant Schoenebeck, Biaoshuai Tao, Lirong XiaWWW 2025 · 1 citation
Builds on4
- Dominantly Truthful Multi-task Peer Prediction with a Constant Number of TasksYuqing KongSODA 2020 · 33 citations
- Information Elicitation Mechanisms for Statistical EstimationYuqing Kong, Grant Schoenebeck, Biaoshuai Tao, Fang-Yi YuAAAI 2020 · 22 citations
- Information Elicitation from Rowdy CrowdsGrant Schoenebeck, Fang-Yi Yu, Yichi ZhangWWW 2021 · 18 citations
- High-Effort Crowds: Limited Liability via TournamentsYichi Zhang, Grant SchoenebeckWWW 2023 · 10 citations
Related papers
- Peer Prediction for Learning AgentsShi Feng, Fang-Yi Yu, Yiling ChenNeurIPS 2022 · 9 citations
- Carrot and Stick: Eliciting Comparison Data and BeyondYiling Chen, Shi Feng, Fang-Yi YuNeurIPS 2024 · 5 citations
- Truthful Data Acquisition via Peer PredictionYiling Chen, Yiheng Shen, Shuran ZhengNeurIPS 2020 · 35 citations
- Plant-and-Steal: Truthful Fair Allocations via PredictionsIlan Reuven Cohen, Alon Eden, Talya Eden, Arsen VasilyanNeurIPS 2024 · 9 citations
- Online Information Acquisition: Hiring Multiple AgentsFederico Cacciamani, Matteo Castiglioni, Nicola GattiICLR 2024 · 3 citations
