Blunt Honesty, Incentives, and Knowledge Exchange

Bruce Knuteson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1602.06188

2016-02-14

ECONOMICS

Abstract:We propose a simple mechanism to facilitate the buying and selling of useful, bluntly honest information. The for-profit, arm's length knowledge exchange this mechanism enables may dramatically increase the pace of scientific progress.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The Solution to Science's Replication Crisis

Bruce Knuteson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1609.03223

2016-09-12

Abstract:The solution to science's replication crisis is a new ecosystem in which scientists sell what they learn from their research. In each pairwise transaction, the information seller makes (loses) money if he turns out to be correct (incorrect). Responsibility for the determination of correctness is delegated, with appropriate incentives, to the information purchaser. Each transaction is brokered by a central exchange, which holds money from the anonymous information buyer and anonymous information seller in escrow, and which enforces a set of incentives facilitating the transfer of useful, bluntly honest information from the seller to the buyer. This new ecosystem, capitalist science, directly addresses socialist science's replication crisis by explicitly rewarding accuracy and penalizing inaccuracy.

General Economics,Physics and Society
Peer Truth Serum: Incentives for Crowdsourcing Measurements and Opinions

Boi Faltings,Radu Jurca,Goran Radanovic

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1704.05269

2017-04-18

Abstract:Modern decision making tools are based on statistical analysis of abundant data, which is often collected by querying multiple individuals. We consider data collection through crowdsourcing, where independent and self-interested agents, non-experts, report measurements, such as sensor readings, opinions, such as product reviews, or answers to human intelligence tasks. Since the accuracy of information is positively correlated with the effort invested in obtaining it, self-interested agents tend to report low-quality data. Therefore, there is a need for incentives that cover the cost of effort, while discouraging random reports. We propose a novel incentive mechanism called Peer Truth Serum that encourages truthful and accurate reporting, showing that it is the unique mechanism to satisfy a combination of desirable properties.

Computer Science and Game Theory
An Information Theoretic Framework For Designing Information Elicitation Mechanisms That Reward Truth-telling

Yuqing Kong,Grant Schoenebeck

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1605.01021

2018-01-18

Abstract:In the setting where information cannot be verified, we propose a simple yet powerful information theoretical framework---the Mutual Information Paradigm---for information elicitation mechanisms. Our framework pays every agent a measure of mutual information between her signal and a peer's signal. We require that the mutual information measurement has the key property that any "data processing" on the two random variables will decrease the mutual information between them. We identify such information measures that generalize Shannon mutual information. Our Mutual Information Paradigm overcomes the two main challenges in information elicitation without verification: (1) how to incentivize effort and avoid agents colluding to report random or identical responses (2) how to motivate agents who believe they are in the minority to report truthfully. Aided by the information measures we found, (1) we use the paradigm to design a family of novel mechanisms where truth-telling is a dominant strategy and any other strategy will decrease every agent's expected payment (in the multi-question, detail free, minimal setting where the number of questions is large); (2) we show the versatility of our framework by providing a unified theoretical understanding of existing mechanisms---Peer Prediction [Miller 2005], Bayesian Truth Serum [Prelec 2004], and Dasgupta and Ghosh [2013]---by mapping them into our framework such that theoretical results of those existing mechanisms can be reconstructed easily. We also give an impossibility result which illustrates, in a certain sense, the the optimality of our framework.

Computer Science and Game Theory
Making Money from What You Know - How to Sell Information?

Shani Alkoby,Zihe Wang,David Sarne,Pingzhong Tang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33012421

2019-01-01

Abstract:Information plays a key role in many decision situations. The rapid advancement in communication technologies makes information providers more accessible, and various information providing platforms can be found nowadays, most of which are strategic in the sense that their goal is to maximize the providers' expected profit. In this paper, we consider the common problem of a strategic information provider offering prospective buyers information which can disambiguate uncertainties the buyers have, which can be valuable for their decision making Unlike prior work, we do not limit the information provider's strategy to price setting but rather enable her flexibility over the way information is sold, specifically enabling querying about specific outcomes and the elimination of a subset of non-true world states alongside the traditional approach of disclosing the true world state. We prove that for the case where the buyer is self-interested (and the information provider does not know the true world state beforehand) all three methods (i.e., disclosing the true world state value, offering to check a specific value, and eliminating a random value) are equivalent, yielding the same expected profit to the information provider. For the case where buyers are human subjects, using an extensive set of experiments we show that the methods result in substantially different outcomes. Furthermore, using standard machine learning techniques the information provider can rather accurately predict the performance of the different methods for new problem settings, hence substantially increase profit.
Price Mechanism for Knowledge Transfer: An Integrative Theory

Ming-Hui Huang,Eric T.G. Wang,Abraham Seidmann

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2753/mis0742-1222240303

IF: 7.582

2007-12-01

Journal of Management Information Systems

Abstract:Knowledge transferred in the open market via a price mechanism enjoys the benefits of avoiding internal competition, learning from external competitors, and accmulating diversified knowledge. In the market, users can access a repository of knowledge for a single price (repository pricing) or knowledge items in the repository can be sold individually (knowledge pricing). However, users have been found to prefer repository pricing but not the knowledge in the repository. This irrationality can cause market failure because users derive a suboptimal level of utility from the knowledge repository, and vendors have contradictory pricing and knowledge strategies. We empirically examine a joint explanation from two competing theoretical perspectives that accounts for this inconsistency nicely: The mental accounting perspective endorses repository pricing because it entices users with the benefits of the whole repository, whereas the transaction decoupling perspective finds expression in individually priced knowledge because it prevents the discrete benefit of knowledge from becoming obscure. By integrating the two theoretical perspectives and considering price, knowledge, and user characteristics simultaneously, the results offer important implications for the market transfer of knowledge. Repository pricing attracts users and is essential to initiate the transfer process, whereas knowledge pricing generates knowledge preference and is thus an effective approach for learning.

information science & library science,management,computer science, information systems
Honesty is being put through the mill

Mark Buchanan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-024-02430-2

IF: 19.684

2024-03-15

Nature Physics

Abstract:Of course, some papers do little more than criticize, picking holes in previous arguments, or showing flaws in data analysis or a lack of full consideration of all possible interpretations. Such criticisms can sometimes be a little brutal, but these works are also ultimately positive — science depends on errors being challenged and ultimately corrected, even if this often takes some time and bruises some egos along the way. In this regard, Richard Feynman was correct in saying that in science, "we are trying to prove ourselves incorrect as quickly as possible". Again, it requires honesty. Some threats have come from organized and well-funded groups with political interests directly threatened by scientific information. No one can be unaware of the consistent efforts of the fossil fuel or tobacco industries over many years to spread doubts about the scientific consensus on climate change or the risks of smoking. Sadly, the consultants and public relations professionals behind these campaigns don't share the same norms of honesty as the scientific community. They're not trying to avoid spreading misleading information; quite the opposite.

physics, multidisciplinary
Honest signaling in academic publishing

Leonid Tiokhin,Karthik Panchanathan,Daniel Lakens,Simine Vazire,Thomas Morgan,Kevin Zollman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246675

IF: 3.7

2021-02-23

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Academic journals provide a key quality-control mechanism in science. Yet, information asymmetries and conflicts of interests incentivize scientists to deceive journals about the quality of their research. How can honesty be ensured, despite incentives for deception? Here, we address this question by applying the theory of honest signaling to the publication process. Our models demonstrate that several mechanisms can ensure honest journal submission, including differential benefits, differential costs, and costs to resubmitting rejected papers. Without submission costs, scientists benefit from submitting all papers to high-ranking journals, unless papers can only be submitted a limited number of times. Counterintuitively, our analysis implies that inefficiencies in academic publishing (e.g., arbitrary formatting requirements, long review times) can serve a function by disincentivizing scientists from submitting low-quality work to high-ranking journals. Our models provide simple, powerful tools for understanding how to promote honest paper submission in academic publishing.
Personal Motivation, Incentive Choices and the Knowledge Transfer from Individual to Organization

FENG Fan,LIAO Fei,YANG Zhong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.19616/j.cnki.bmj.2007.13.011

2007-01-01

Abstract:The most important factor embarrassing knowledge transfer is the individual's behavior to take the knowledge as private assets, which has been entitled as the social dilemma in knowledge sharing.The organizational economists and organizational theorists have all direct their eyes on this topic.Some researchers have endeavored to integrate those two branches that it has been new direction in knowledge manage- ment research field.The issue can be thought as a new approach.The authors argue that general knowledge and specific knowledge can be considered as the nature property,private goods and public goods can be considered as the societal property.The organization must make tradeoff on these two dimensions of knowledge to flexibly design incentive plan consists of different incentive instrument to motivate individual effi- ciently to weaken the sticky degree of knowledge in transferring.This research offers us a possible empirical research framework on incentives in knowledge transfer approach.
Exploration and Persuasion

Aleksandrs Slivkins

2024-10-22

Abstract:How to incentivize self-interested agents to explore when they prefer to exploit? Consider a population of self-interested agents that make decisions under uncertainty. They "explore" to acquire new information and "exploit" this information to make good decisions. Collectively they need to balance these two objectives, but their incentives are skewed toward exploitation. This is because exploration is costly, but its benefits are spread over many agents in the future. "Incentivized Exploration" addresses this issue via strategic communication. Consider a benign ``principal" which can communicate with the agents and make recommendations, but cannot force the agents to comply. Moreover, suppose the principal can observe the agents' decisions and the outcomes of these decisions. The goal is to design a communication and recommendation policy which (i) achieves a desirable balance between exploration and exploitation, and (ii) incentivizes the agents to follow recommendations. What makes it feasible is "information asymmetry": the principal knows more than any one agent, as it collects information from many. It is essential that the principal does not fully reveal all its knowledge to the agents. Incentivized exploration combines two important problems in, resp., machine learning and theoretical economics. First, if agents always follow recommendations, the principal faces a multi-armed bandit problem: essentially, design an algorithm that balances exploration and exploitation. Second, interaction with a single agent corresponds to "Bayesian persuasion", where a principal leverages information asymmetry to convince an agent to take a particular action. We provide a brief but self-contained introduction to each problem through the lens of incentivized exploration, solving a key special case of the former as a sub-problem of the latter.

Computer Science and Game Theory,Machine Learning,Theoretical Economics
Knowledge Sharing and Learning among Smallholders in Developing Economies: Implications, Incentives, and Reward Mechanisms

Shihong Xiao,Ying-Ju Chen,Christopher S. Tang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2750337

2016-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:In developing economies, smallholders apply their own specialized knowledge and exert costly effort to manage their farms. To raise overall productivity, NGOs and governments are advocating various knowledge sharing and learning platforms for farmers to exchange a variety of farming techniques. Putting altruism aside, we examine the overall economic implications for heterogeneous farmers to share their private knowledge voluntarily with others under (implicit) competition. By analyzing a multiperson sequential game, we find that farmers with high knowledge are reluctant to share knowledge, and consequently the voluntary shared level is always lower than or equal to the “efficient” shared level that maximizes farmer welfare under coordination. This finding is motivational in developing a reward mechanism to entice farmers to elevate their knowledge shared level in a decentralized system so as to maximize farmer welfare. Upon reviewing different mechanisms, we propose a quota-based reward mechanism that can entice farmers to share knowledge voluntarily up to the efficient shared level.
Rationalizing risk aversion in science: Why incentives to work hard clash with incentives to take risks

Kevin Gross,Carl T Bergstrom

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002750

2024-08-15

Abstract:Scientific research requires taking risks, as the most cautious approaches are unlikely to lead to the most rapid progress. Yet, much funded scientific research plays it safe and funding agencies bemoan the difficulty of attracting high-risk, high-return research projects. Why don't the incentives for scientific discovery adequately impel researchers toward such projects? Here, we adapt an economic contracting model to explore how the unobservability of risk and effort discourages risky research. The model considers a hidden-action problem, in which the scientific community must reward discoveries in a way that encourages effort and risk-taking while simultaneously protecting researchers' livelihoods against the vicissitudes of scientific chance. Its challenge when doing so is that incentives to motivate effort clash with incentives to motivate risk-taking, because a failed project may be evidence of a risky undertaking but could also be the result of simple sloth. As a result, the incentives needed to encourage effort actively discourage risk-taking. Scientists respond by working on safe projects that generate evidence of effort but that don't move science forward as rapidly as riskier projects would. A social planner who prizes scientific productivity above researchers' well-being could remedy the problem by rewarding major discoveries richly enough to induce high-risk research, but in doing so would expose scientists to a degree of livelihood risk that ultimately leaves them worse off. Because the scientific community is approximately self-governing and constructs its own reward schedule, the incentives that researchers are willing to impose on themselves are inadequate to motivate the scientific risks that would best expedite scientific progress.
Using Prediction Markets to Incentivize and Measure Collective Knowledge Production

Thomas Maillart,Didier Sornette

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1406.7746

2014-06-30

Abstract:We present a mechanism design, coupling an online collaboration software and a prediction market, which allows tracking down the very roots of individual incentives, actions and how these behaviors influence collective intelligence in terms of knowledge production as a public good. We show that the incentive mechanism efficiently engages users without further governance structure, and doesn't crowd out intrinsic motivation. Furthermore, it enables a powerful and robust creative destruction process, which helps quickly filter out irrelevant knowledge. While still at an early stage, this mechanism design can not only bring insights for knowledge production organization design, but also has the potential to illuminate the fundamental mechanisms underlying the emergence of collective intelligence.

Computer Science and Game Theory
Salesforce Incentives, Market Information, and Production/Inventory Planning

FR Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0217

IF: 5.4

2005-01-01

Management Science

Abstract:Salespeople are the eyes and ears of the firms they serve. They possess market knowledge that is critical for a wide range of decisions. A key question is how a firm can provide incentives to its salesforce so that it is in their interest to truthfully disclose their information about the market and to work hard. Many people have considered this question and provided solutions. Perhaps the most well-known solution is due to Gonik (1978), who proposed and implemented a clever scheme designed to elicit market information and encourage hard work. The purpose of this paper is to study Gonik's scheme and compare it with a menu of linear contracts—a solution often used in the agency literature—in a model where the market information possessed by the salesforce is important for the firm's production and inventory-planning decisions.
Scientific Utopia: II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability

Brian A. Nosek,Jeffrey Robert Spies,Matt Motyl

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/k4bgq

2016-08-29

Abstract:An academic scientist’s professional success depends on publishing. Publishing norms emphasize novel, positive results. As such, disciplinary incentives encourage design, analysis, and reporting decisions that elicit positive results and ignore negative results. Prior reports demonstrate how these incentives inflate the rate of false effects in published science. When incentives favor novelty over replication, false results persist in the literature unchallenged, reducing efficiency in knowledge accumulation. Previous suggestions to address this problem are unlikely to be effective. For example, a journal of negative results publishes otherwise unpublishable reports. This enshrines the low status of the journal and its content. The persistence of false findings can be meliorated with strategies that make the fundamental but abstract accuracy motive – getting it right – competitive with the more tangible and concrete incentive – getting it published. We develop strategies for improving scientific practices and knowledge accumulation that account for ordinary human motivations and biases.
Incentive Issues and Solution Mechanisms for Knowledge Transfer with Enterprise 2.0 Technologies: A Game-Theoretic Approach.

Xianjun Geng,Lihui Lin,Andrew B. Whinston

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/hicss.2014.503

2014-01-01

Abstract:Firms increasingly use enterprise social media for knowledge activities such as knowledge transfer. In an enterprise setting, it is often the case that the receiver of transferred knowledge will make decisions that have ramifications for the knowledge sender. Using a game-theoretic approach, this paper studies the consequences when a knowledge sender has incentive to transfer knowledge strategically and the mechanisms that can be designed to deter such strategic behavior. We find that knowledge transfer may fail when senders transfer knowledge strategically, but knowledge receivers can design a probabilistic auditing mechanism to ensure truthful knowledge transfer. Our results suggest that a knowledge receiver's own knowledge can facilitate truthful knowledge transfer, but the receiver should not let her own knowledge be known by the sender. This research contributes to the knowledge management literature, and has interesting implications for the adoption and use of enterprise social media.
Optimal Mechanisms for Selling Information

Moshe Babaioff,Robert Kleinberg,Renato Paes Leme

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1204.5519

2012-04-25

Abstract:The buying and selling of information is taking place at a scale unprecedented in the history of commerce, thanks to the formation of online marketplaces for user data. Data providing agencies sell user information to advertisers to allow them to match ads to viewers more effectively. In this paper we study the design of optimal mechanisms for a monopolistic data provider to sell information to a buyer, in a model where both parties have (possibly correlated) private signals about a state of the world, and the buyer uses information learned from the seller, along with his own signal, to choose an action (e.g., displaying an ad) whose payoff depends on the state of the world. We provide sufficient conditions under which there is a simple one-round protocol (i.e. a protocol where the buyer and seller each sends a single message, and there is a single money transfer) achieving optimal revenue. In these cases we present a polynomial-time algorithm that computes the optimal mechanism. Intriguingly, we show that multiple rounds of partial information disclosure (interleaved by payment to the seller) are sometimes necessary to achieve optimal revenue if the buyer is allowed to abort his interaction with the seller prematurely. We also prove some negative results about the inability of simple mechanisms for selling information to approximate more complicated ones in the worst case.

Computer Science and Game Theory
Truthful ownership transfer with expert advice: Blending mechanism design with and without money

Ioannis Caragiannis,Aris Filos-Ratsikas,Swaprava Nath,Alexandros A. Voudouris

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1802.01308

2020-02-21

Abstract:When a company undergoes a merger or transfers its ownership, the existing governing body has an opinion on which buyer should take over as the new owner. Similar situations occur while assigning the host of big sports tournaments, like the World Cup or the Olympics. In all these settings, the values of the external bidders are as important as the opinions of the internal experts. Motivated by such scenarios, we consider a social welfare maximizing approach to design and analyze truthful mechanisms in {\em hybrid social choice} settings, where payments can be imposed to the bidders, but not to the experts. Since this problem is a combination of mechanism design with and without monetary transfers, classical solutions like VCG cannot be applied, making this a novel mechanism design problem. We consider the simple but fundamental scenario with one expert and two bidders, and provide tight approximation guarantees of the optimal social welfare. We distinguish between mechanisms that use ordinal and cardinal information, as well as between mechanisms that base their decisions on one of the two sides (either the bidders or the expert) or both. Our analysis shows that the cardinal setting is quite rich and admits several non-trivial randomized truthful mechanisms, and also allows for closer-to-optimal welfare guarantees.

Computer Science and Game Theory
Truthful Auction Mechanism for Data Trading with Share-Averse Data Consumers

Zhenni Feng,Qiyuan Wang,Yanmin Zhu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/MSN57253.2022.00075

2022-01-01

Abstract:In the paper we focus on a promising research problem of data trading, under the scenario that data items can be reproduced easily and inexpensively. Apart from a Bayesian optimal mechanism based data trading approach, we also propose a prior-free data trading approach to organize the data trading process between selfish data owners and share-averse data consumers, with the goal of maximizing revenue of data owners and meanwhile determining the optimal number of data copies. Rigorous theoretical analysis and extensive experiment results are offered to verify the effectiveness of proposed methods in terms of sum of valuations, revenue, individual rationality and incentive compatibility.
Mechanisms for Making Crowds Truthful

Radu Jurca,Boi Faltings

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1401.3451

2014-01-15

Computer Science and Game Theory

Abstract:We consider schemes for obtaining truthful reports on a common but hidden signal from large groups of rational, self-interested agents. One example are online feedback mechanisms, where users provide observations about the quality of a product or service so that other users can have an accurate idea of what quality they can expect. However, (i) providing such feedback is costly, and (ii) there are many motivations for providing incorrect feedback. Both problems can be addressed by reward schemes which (i) cover the cost of obtaining and reporting feedback, and (ii) maximize the expected reward of a rational agent who reports truthfully. We address the design of such incentive-compatible rewards for feedback generated in environments with pure adverse selection. Here, the correlation between the true knowledge of an agent and her beliefs regarding the likelihoods of reports of other agents can be exploited to make honest reporting a Nash equilibrium. In this paper we extend existing methods for designing incentive-compatible rewards by also considering collusion. We analyze different scenarios, where, for example, some or all of the agents collude. For each scenario we investigate whether a collusion-resistant, incentive-compatible reward scheme exists, and use automated mechanism design to specify an algorithm for deriving an efficient reward mechanism.
Incentive Mechanism Research on Knowledge Sharing in Enterprises Based on Principal-Agent Theory

Fan Bin,Ju Xiao-feng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/icmse.2008.4669029

2008-01-01

Abstract:In the increasing keen market competition, knowledge capital is gradually becoming important resource. Knowledge sharing can make organizational knowledge freely flow in definite range and save the cost of knowledge acquisition to enhance knowledge productivity and benefit for knowledge application and innovation. Itpsilas necessary for enterprise to apply fit incentive mechanism to insure the enthusiasm of staffs because of knowledge private property. The purpose of this paper is designing effective incentive mechanism of employee knowledge sharing based on the basic of Principal-agent Theory. In this paper, we assume that enterprise is principal and employee is agent, then we creates respectively incentive mathematical model of information symmetry and information asymmetry. Through the model solution, the optimal incentive mechanism contract is obtained. Finally we get some properties of optimal incentive mechanism by mathematical analysis. The results indicate that whether information is symmetrical or not, whether employee is risk neutral or not, the optimal incentive contract should satisfy that employeepsilas cost coefficient of knowledge sharing effort isnpsilat more than his output coefficient of knowledge sharing effort. The paper supplies theoretical basis and practical guide to promote staff knowledge sharing for enterprise manager.

Blunt Honesty, Incentives, and Knowledge Exchange

The Solution to Science's Replication Crisis

Peer Truth Serum: Incentives for Crowdsourcing Measurements and Opinions

An Information Theoretic Framework For Designing Information Elicitation Mechanisms That Reward Truth-telling

Making Money from What You Know - How to Sell Information?

Price Mechanism for Knowledge Transfer: An Integrative Theory

Honesty is being put through the mill

Honest signaling in academic publishing

Personal Motivation, Incentive Choices and the Knowledge Transfer from Individual to Organization

Exploration and Persuasion

Knowledge Sharing and Learning among Smallholders in Developing Economies: Implications, Incentives, and Reward Mechanisms

Rationalizing risk aversion in science: Why incentives to work hard clash with incentives to take risks

Using Prediction Markets to Incentivize and Measure Collective Knowledge Production

Salesforce Incentives, Market Information, and Production/Inventory Planning

Scientific Utopia: II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability

Incentive Issues and Solution Mechanisms for Knowledge Transfer with Enterprise 2.0 Technologies: A Game-Theoretic Approach.

Optimal Mechanisms for Selling Information

Truthful ownership transfer with expert advice: Blending mechanism design with and without money

Truthful Auction Mechanism for Data Trading with Share-Averse Data Consumers

Mechanisms for Making Crowds Truthful

Incentive Mechanism Research on Knowledge Sharing in Enterprises Based on Principal-Agent Theory