constructive preference elicitation
Clicks: 129
ID: 182340
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.2
/100
129 views
44 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #27 of 32 articles by views in canadian journal of philosophy
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
When faced with large or complex decision problems, human decision makers (DM) can make costly mistakes, due to inherent limitations of their memory, attention, and knowledge. Preference elicitation tools assist the decision maker in overcoming these limitations. They do so by interactively learning the DM’s preferences through appropriately chosen queries and suggesting high-quality outcomes based on the preference estimates. Most state-of-the-art techniques, however, fail in constructive settings, where the goal is to synthesize a custom or entirely novel configuration rather than choosing the best option among a given set of candidates. Many wide-spread problems are constructive in nature: customizing composite goods such as cars and computers, bundling products, recommending touristic travel plans, designing apartments, buildings, or urban layouts, etc. In these settings, the full set of outcomes is humongous and can not be explicitly enumerated, and the solution must be synthesized via constrained optimization. In this article, we describe recent approaches especially designed for constructive problems, outlining the underlying ideas and their differences as well as their limitations. In presenting them, we especially focus on novel issues that the constructive setting brings forth, such as how to deal with sparsity of the DM’s preferences, how to properly frame the interaction, and how to achieve efficient synthesis of custom instances.
| Reference Key |
dragone2018frontiersconstructive
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Paolo Dragone;Paolo Dragone;Stefano Teso;Andrea Passerini |
| Journal | canadian journal of philosophy |
| Year | 2018 |
| DOI |
10.3389/frobt.2017.00071
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.