REVIEW 1 cited by
Removing Bias and Incentivizing Precision in Peer-grading
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
We study peer-grading with competitive graders who enjoy a higher utility when their peers get lower scores. We propose a new mechanism, PEQA, that incentivizes such graders through a score-assignment rule which aggregates the final score from multiple peer-evaluations, and a grading performance score that rewards performance in the peer-grading exercise. PEQA makes grader-bias irrelevant. Additionally, under PEQA, a peer-grader's utility increases monotonically with the reliability of her grading, irrespective of her competitiveness and how her co-graders act. In a reasonably general class of score assignment rules, PEQA uniquely satisfies this utility- reliability monotonicity. When grading is costly and costs are private information, a modified version of PEQA implements the socially optimal effort choices in an equilibrium of the peer-evaluation game. Data from our classroom experiments confirm our theoretical assumptions and show that PEQA outperforms the popular median mechanism.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Rank It, Then Ask It: Input Reranking for Maximizing the Performance of LLMs on Symmetric Tasks
Reranking symmetric-task inputs so that query-relevant elements occupy high-exposure positions can substantially reduce LLM errors on aggregate queries.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.