Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Andrew Mao

dblp:71/10037 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
8ranked-venue papers
3as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · conflict

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 2 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2 · 1 first-authorHuman-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 2 first-authorComputer networks · 1Security and privacy · 1Theory of computation · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
2 papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Multi-agent systems · 100%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Collaborative and social computing · 100%
Network and information security
1 paper
Network security · 100%

Topics — the 9 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › equilibrium analysis
equilibrium selection
0.212014
Trick or treat: putting peer prediction to the test · EC 2014
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › incentive mechanism design
peer prediction
0.212014
Trick or treat: putting peer prediction to the test · EC 2014
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › information elicitation
truthful elicitation
0.212014
Trick or treat: putting peer prediction to the test · EC 2014
Collaborative and social computing
human computation
0.212013
Better Human Computation Through Principled Voting · AAAI 2013
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems
crowdsourcing
0.112012
Adaptive Polling for Information Aggregation · AAAI 2012
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems › social choice › computational social choice
information aggregation
0.112012
Adaptive Polling for Information Aggregation · AAAI 2012
Network security
anonymity networks
0.112010
A3: An Extensible Platform for Application-Aware Anonymity · NDSS 2010
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
computational social choice
0.012013
Better Human Computation Through Principled Voting · AAAI 2013
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice
voting rules
0.012013
Better Human Computation Through Principled Voting · AAAI 2013

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

voting rule evaluation · 0.3hidden markov model · 0.2crowdsourcing experiments · 0.2crowdsourcing experiment · 0.2ranking estimation · 0.1pairwise comparison · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Improving the TENOR of Labeling: Re-evaluating Topic Models for Content Analysis
abstract
Zongxia Li, Andrew Mao, Daniel Stephens, Pranav Goel, Emily Walpole, Alden Dima, Juan Fung, Jordan Boyd-Graber. Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2024.
Zongxia Li, Andrew Mao, Daniel Kofi Stephens, Pranav Goel 0001, Emily Walpole, Alden Dima, Juan Fung, Jordan L. Boyd-Graber
EACL (1)2
2014 Trick or treat: putting peer prediction to the test
abstract
Collecting truthful subjective information from multiple individuals is an important problem in many social and online systems. While peer prediction mechanisms promise to elicit truthful information by rewarding participants with carefully constructed payments, they also admit uninformative equilibria where coordinating participants provide no useful information. To understand how participants behave towards such mechanisms in practice, we conduct the first controlled online experiment of a peer prediction mechanism, engaging the participants in a multiplayer, real-time and repeated game. Using a hidden Markov model to capture players' strategies from their actions, our results show that participants successfully coordinate on uninformative equilibria and the truthful equilibrium is not focal, even when some uninformative equilibria do not exist or are undesirable. In contrast, most players are consistently truthful in the absence of peer prediction, suggesting that these mechanisms may be harmful when truthful reporting has similar cost to strategic behavior.
Xi Alice Gao, Andrew Mao, Yiling Chen 0001, Ryan P. Adams
EC2
2014 The design and implementation of the A3 application-aware anonymity platform
Micah Sherr, Harjot Gill, Taher Saeed, Andrew Mao, William R. Marczak, Saravana Soundararajan, Wenchao Zhou, Boon Thau Loo, Matt Blaze
Comput. Networks4
2013 Better Human Computation Through Principled Voting
abstract
Designers of human computation systms often face the need to aggregate noisy information provided by multiple people. While voting is often used for this purpose, the choice of voting method is typically not principled. We conduct extensive experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk to better understand how different voting rules perform in practice. Our empirical conclusions show that noisy human voting can differ from what popular theoretical models would predict. Our short-term goal is to motivate the design of better human computation systems; our long-term goal is to spark an interaction between researchers in (computational) social choice and human computation.
Andrew Mao, Ariel D. Procaccia, Yiling Chen 0001
AAAI1
2013 Volunteering Versus Work for Pay: Incentives and Tradeoffs in Crowdsourcing
abstract
Paid and volunteer crowd work have emerged as a means for harnessing human intelligence for performing diverse tasks. However, little is known about the relative performance of volunteer versus paid crowd work, and how financial incentives influence the quality and efficiency of output. We study the performance of volunteers as well as workers paid with different monetary schemes on a difficult real-world crowdsourcing task. We observe that performance by unpaid and paid workers can be compared in carefully designed tasks, that financial incentives can be used to trade quality for speed, and that the compensation system on Amazon Mechanical Turk creates particular indirect incentives for workers. Our methodology and results have implications for the ideal choice of financial incentives and motivates further study on how monetary incentives influence worker behavior in crowdsourcing.
Andrew Mao, Ece Kamar, Yiling Chen 0001, Eric Horvitz, Megan E. Schwamb, Chris J. Lintott, Arfon M. Smith
HCOMP1
2013 Why Stop Now? Predicting Worker Engagement in Online Crowdsourcing
abstract
We present studies of the attention and time, or engagement, invested by crowd workers on tasks. Consideration of worker engagement is especially important in volunteer settings such as online citizen science. Using data from Galaxy Zoo, a prominent citizen science project, we design and construct statistical models that provide predictions about the forthcoming engagement of volunteers. We characterize the accuracy of predictions with respect to different sets of features that describe user behavior and study the sensitivity of predictions to variations in the amount of data and retraining. We design our model for guiding system actions in real-time settings, and discuss the prospect for harnessing predictive models of engagement to enhance user attention and effort on volunteer tasks.
Andrew Mao, Ece Kamar, Eric Horvitz
HCOMP1
2012 Adaptive Polling for Information Aggregation
abstract
The flourishing of online labor markets such as Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) makes it easy to recruit many workers for solving small tasks. We study whether information elicitation and aggregation over a combinatorial space can be achieved by integrating small pieces of potentially imprecise information, gathered from a large number of workers through simple, one-shot interactions in an online labor market. We consider the setting of predicting the ranking of $n$ competing candidates, each having a hidden underlying strength parameter. At each step, our method estimates the strength parameters from the collected pairwise comparison data and adaptively chooses another pairwise comparison question for the next recruited worker. Through an MTurk experiment, we show that the adaptive method effectively elicits and aggregates information, outperforming a naive method using a random pairwise comparison question at each step.
Thomas Pfeiffer 0003, Xi Alice Gao, Yiling Chen 0001, Andrew Mao, David G. Rand
AAAI4
2010 A3: An Extensible Platform for Application-Aware Anonymity
Micah Sherr, Andrew Mao, William R. Marczak, Wenchao Zhou, Boon Thau Loo, Matt Blaze
NDSS2