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

Elena A. Erosheva

dblp:00/7305 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
0000-0003-2162-0017ORCID · verified

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021

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.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 100%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured prediction › ranking model
mallows model
0.612022
A Unified Statistical Learning Model for Rankings and Scores with Application to Grant Panel Review · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2022
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › structured prediction
ranking model
0.612022
A Unified Statistical Learning Model for Rankings and Scores with Application to Grant Panel Review · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2022

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

tree-search algorithm · 1.1maximum likelihood estimation · 1.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 A Unified Statistical Learning Model for Rankings and Scores with Application to Grant Panel Review
abstract
Rankings and scores are two common data types used by judges to express preferences and/or perceptions of quality in a collection of objects. Numerous models exist to study data of each type separately, but no unified statistical model captures both data types simultaneously without first performing data conversion. We propose the Mallows-Binomial model to close this gap, which combines a Mallows $\phi$ ranking model with Binomial score models through shared parameters that quantify object quality, a consensus ranking, and the level of consensus among judges. We propose an efficient tree-search algorithm to calculate the exact MLE of model parameters, study statistical properties of the model both analytically and through simulation, and apply our model to real data from an instance of grant panel review that collected both scores and partial rankings. Furthermore, we demonstrate how model outputs can be used to rank objects with confidence. The proposed model is shown to sensibly combine information from both scores and rankings to quantify object quality and measure consensus with appropriate levels of statistical uncertainty.
Michael Pearce, Elena A. Erosheva
J. Mach. Learn. Res.2