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

Gaël Le Mens

dblp:161/1692 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—ORCID · unresolved

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

Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 5Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 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.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Information retrieval · 93% Web and social media mining · 7%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Information retrieval › ranking
popularity ranking
0.412019
The few-get-richer: a surprising consequence of popularity-based rankings? · WWW 2019
Information retrieval
ranking
0.412019
The few-get-richer: a surprising consequence of popularity-based rankings? · WWW 2019
Information retrieval › ranking
ranking algorithms
0.412019
The few-get-richer: a surprising consequence of popularity-based rankings? · WWW 2019
Information retrieval
retrieval models
0.412019
The few-get-richer: a surprising consequence of popularity-based rankings? · WWW 2019
Web and social media mining › information diffusion
misinformation propagation
0.112019
The few-get-richer: a surprising consequence of popularity-based rankings? · WWW 2019

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

simulation · 0.4online experiment · 0.4analytical modeling · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2019 The few-get-richer: a surprising consequence of popularity-based rankings?
abstract
Ranking algorithms play a crucial role in online platforms ranging from search engines to recommender systems. In this paper, we identify a surprising consequence of popularity-based rankings: the fewer the items reporting a given signal, the higher the share of the overall traffic they collectively attract. This few-get-richer effect emerges in settings where there are few distinct classes of items (e.g., left-leaning news sources versus right-leaning news sources), and items are ranked based on their popularity. We demonstrate analytically that the few-get-richer effect emerges when people tend to click on top-ranked items and have heterogeneous preferences for the classes of items. Using simulations, we analyze how the strength of the effect changes with assumptions about the setting and human behavior. We also test our predictions experimentally in an online experiment with human participants. Our findings have important implications to understand the spread of misinformation.
Fabrizio Germano, Vicenç Gómez, Gaël Le Mens
WWW3
2018 Learning Variability from Experience
Elizaveta Konovalova, Gaël Le Mens
CogSci2
2017 Selective Information Sampling and the In-Group Heterogeneity Effect
Elizaveta Konovalova, Gaël Le Mens
CogSci2
2016 Predictions with Uncertain Categorization: A Rational Model
Elizaveta Konovalova, Gaël Le Mens
CogSci2
2013 Information Sampling, Conformity and Collective Mistaken Beliefs
Jerker Denrell, Gaël Le Mens
CogSci2