REVIEW 1 cited by
Uncertainty in Ranking
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
Ranks estimated from data are uncertain and this poses a challenge in many applications. However, estimated ranks are deterministic functions of estimated parameters, so the uncertainty in the ranks must be determined by the uncertainty in the parameter estimates. We give a complete characterization of this relationship in terms of the linear extensions of a partial order determined by interval estimates of the parameters of interest. We then use this relationship to give a set estimator for the overall ranking, use its size to measure the uncertainty in a ranking, and give efficient algorithms for several questions of interest. We show that our set estimator is a valid confidence set and describe its relationship to a joint confidence set for ranks recently proposed by Klein, Wright \& Wieczorek. We apply our methods to both simulated and real data and make them available through the R package rankUncertainty.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Quantifying Ranking Uncertainty in LLM Benchmarks
MMLU ranking uncertainty is dominated by subject-level variability; rank confidence intervals widen substantially when subjects are treated as the sampling unit.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.