Advertisement

Assessing the Influence of Conflict Profile Properties on the Quality of Consensus

  • Adrianna Kozierkiewicz
  • Marcin PietranikEmail author
  • Mateusz Sitarczyk
Conference paper
  • 288 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 12033)

Abstract

Asserting a high quality of data integration results frequently involves broadening a number of merged data sources. But does more always mean more? In this paper we apply a consensus theory, originating from the collective intelligence field, and investigate which parameters describing a collective affects the quality of its consensus, which can be treated as an output of the data integration, most prominently. Eventually, we identified, either analytically or experimentally, adjusting which properties of the conflict profile (input data) asserts exceeding expected integration quality. In other words-which properties have the biggest influence and which are insignificant.

Keywords

Consensus theory Collective intelligence Knowledge management Data integration 

References

  1. 1.
    Bogart, K.P.: Preference structures I: distances between transitive preference relations. J. Math. Sociol. 3(1), 49–67 (1973)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Duong, T.H., Nguyen, N.T., Nguyen, D.C., Nguyen, T.P.T., Selamat, A.: Trust-based consensus for collaborative ontology building. Cybern. Syst. 45(2), 146–164 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Duong, T.H., Nguyen, N.T., Truong, H.B., Nguyen, V.H.: A collaborative algorithm for semantic video annotation using a consensus-based social network analysis. Expert Syst. Appl. 42(1), 246–258 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Green, B.: Testing and quantifying collective intelligence. In: Proceedings of the Collective Intelligence Conference (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Izsak, R.: Working together: committee selection and the supermodular degree. In: Sukthankar, G., Rodriguez-Aguilar, J.A. (eds.) AAMAS 2017. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10642, pp. 103–115. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71682-4_7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jha, D.K., Chattopadhyay, P., Sarkar, S., Ray, A.: Path planning in GPS-denied environments via collective intelligence of distributed sensor networks. Int. J. Control 89(5), 984–999 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kemeny, J.G.: Mathematics without numbers. Daedalus 88, 577–591 (1959)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kozierkiewicz, A.: The analysis of expert opinions’ consensus quality. Inf. Fusion 34, 80–86 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kozierkiewicz, A.: Analysis of susceptibility to the consensus for a few representations of collective knowledge. Int. J. Software Eng. Knowl. Eng. 24(5), 759–775 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lewoniewski, W., Węcel, K., Abramowicz, W.: Relative quality and popularity evaluation of multilingual wikipedia articles. Informatics 4(4), 43 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McHugh, K.A., Yammarino, F.J., Dionne, S.D., Serban, A., Sayama, H., Chatterjee, S.: Collective decision making, leadership, and collective intelligence: tests with agent-based simulations and a field study. Leadersh. Quart. 27(2), 218–241 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nguyen, N.T.: Consensus Choice Methods and their Application to Solving Conflicts in Distributed Systems. Wroclaw University of Technology Press, Wroclaw (2002). (in Polish)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nguyen, N.T.: Advanced Methods for Inconsistent Knowledge Management. Springer, London (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-889-0CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pretorius, A., Parry, D.A.: Human decision making and artificial intelligence: a comparison in the domain of sports prediction. In: Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists, p. 32. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nguyen, V.D., Merayo, M.G.: Intelligent collective: some issues with collective cardinality. J. Inf. Telecommun. 1(2), 127–140 (2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wagner, C., Suh, A.: The wisdom of crowds: impact of collective size and expertise transfer on collective performance. In: 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 594–603. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Woolley, A.W., Aggarwal, I., Malone, T.W.: Collective intelligence and group performance. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 24(6), 420–424 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Computer Science and ManagementWroclaw University of Science and TechnologyWroclawPoland

Personalised recommendations