confidence interval
- Europe > Switzerland > Zürich > Zürich (0.86)
- Europe > Italy > Lombardy > Milan (0.40)
- North America > United States (0.04)
- (2 more...)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Agents (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Reinforcement Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Learning Graphical Models > Undirected Networks > Markov Models (0.65)
- Europe > Switzerland > Zürich > Zürich (0.14)
- North America > United States > California > Santa Clara County > Palo Alto (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- (3 more...)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts (0.04)
- Europe > Denmark (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Israel > Jerusalem District > Jerusalem (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.14)
- North America > United States > Utah > Salt Lake County > Salt Lake City (0.04)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Reinforcement Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Cognitive Science (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning (0.93)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks > Deep Learning (0.70)
- North America > United States > Louisiana > Orleans Parish > New Orleans (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Europe > Portugal > Porto > Porto (0.04)
- (3 more...)
- North America > United States > California > Santa Barbara County > Santa Barbara (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- Information Technology > Security & Privacy (1.00)
- Health & Medicine (0.67)
- North America > United States (0.14)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks > Deep Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Uncertainty (0.67)
- North America > United States (0.14)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- North America > Canada > Quebec > Montreal (0.04)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Hampshire County > Amherst (0.04)
- North America > Puerto Rico (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
Counterfactual Evaluation of Peer-Review Assignment Policies Supplemental Material Martin Saveski, Steven Jecmen, Nihar B. Shah, Johan Ugander A Linear Programs for Peer-Review Assignment
Our estimators assume that there is no interference between the units, i.e., that the treatment of one The first assumption is quite realistic as in most peer review systems the reviewers cannot see other reviews until they submit their own. The second assumption is important to understand, as there could be "batch effects": a Monte Carlo methods to tightly estimate these covariances. AAAI datasets, we sampled 1 million assignments and computed the empirical covariance. In our setting, small amounts of attrition (relative to the number of policy-induced positivity violations) mean that the fraction of data that is missing is not exactly known before assignment, but almost. To get more robust estimates of the performance, we repeat this process 10 times.