An AGM Approach to Revising Preferences
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2112.14243v1
- Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2021 18:12:57 GMT
- Title: An AGM Approach to Revising Preferences
- Authors: Adrian Haret, Johannes P. Wallner
- Abstract summary: We look at preference change arising out of an interaction between two elements: the first is an initial preference ranking encoding a pre-existing attitude; the second is new preference information signaling input from an authoritative source.
The aim is to adjust the initial preference and bring it in line with the new preference, without having to give up more information than necessary.
We model this process using the formal machinery of belief change, along the lines of the well-known AGM approach.
- Score: 7.99536002595393
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: We look at preference change arising out of an interaction between two
elements: the first is an initial preference ranking encoding a pre-existing
attitude; the second element is new preference information signaling input from
an authoritative source, which may come into conflict with the initial
preference. The aim is to adjust the initial preference and bring it in line
with the new preference, without having to give up more information than
necessary. We model this process using the formal machinery of belief change,
along the lines of the well-known AGM approach. We propose a set of fundamental
rationality postulates, and derive the main results of the paper: a set of
representation theorems showing that preference change according to these
postulates can be rationalized as a choice function guided by a ranking on the
comparisons in the initial preference order. We conclude by presenting
operators satisfying our proposed postulates. Our approach thus allows us to
situate preference revision within the larger family of belief change
operators.
Related papers
- Preference Diffusion for Recommendation [50.8692409346126]
We propose PreferDiff, a tailored optimization objective for DM-based recommenders.
PreferDiff transforms BPR into a log-likelihood ranking objective to better capture user preferences.
It is the first personalized ranking loss designed specifically for DM-based recommenders.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-17T01:02:04Z) - PREDICT: Preference Reasoning by Evaluating Decomposed preferences Inferred from Candidate Trajectories [3.0102456679931944]
This paper introduces PREDICT, a method designed to enhance the precision and adaptability of inferring preferences.
We evaluate PREDICT on two distinct environments: a gridworld setting and a new text-domain environment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-08T18:16:41Z) - An incremental preference elicitation-based approach to learning potentially non-monotonic preferences in multi-criteria sorting [53.36437745983783]
We first construct a max-margin optimization-based model to model potentially non-monotonic preferences.
We devise information amount measurement methods and question selection strategies to pinpoint the most informative alternative in each iteration.
Two incremental preference elicitation-based algorithms are developed to learn potentially non-monotonic preferences.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-04T14:36:20Z) - A First Look at Selection Bias in Preference Elicitation for Recommendation [64.44255178199846]
We study the effect of selection bias in preference elicitation on the resulting recommendations.
A big hurdle is the lack of any publicly available dataset that has preference elicitation interactions.
We propose a simulation of a topic-based preference elicitation process.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-01T14:56:56Z) - Pacos: Modeling Users' Interpretable and Context-Dependent Choices in
Preference Reversals [8.041047797530808]
We identify three factors contributing to context effects: users' adaptive weights, the inter-item comparison, and display positions.
We propose a context-dependent preference model named Pacos as a unified framework for addressing three factors simultaneously.
Experimental results show that the proposed method has better performance than prior works in predicting users' choices.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-03-10T01:49:56Z) - Social Mechanism Design: A Low-Level Introduction [31.564788318133264]
We show that agents have preferences over both decision outcomes and the rules or procedures used to make decisions.
We identify simple, intuitive preference structures at low levels that can be generalized to form the building blocks of preferences at higher levels.
We analyze algorithms for acceptance in two different domains: asymmetric dichotomous choice and constitutional amendment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-11-15T20:59:34Z) - Inferring Lexicographically-Ordered Rewards from Preferences [82.42854687952115]
This paper proposes a method for inferring multi-objective reward-based representations of an agent's observed preferences.
We model the agent's priorities over different objectives as entering lexicographically, so that objectives with lower priorities matter only when the agent is indifferent with respect to objectives with higher priorities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-02-21T12:01:41Z) - Information efficient learning of complexly structured preferences:
Elicitation procedures and their application to decision making under
uncertainty [0.0]
We propose efficient methods for elicitation of complexly structured preferences.
We show that under certain conditions optimal decisions can be found without fully specifying the preference system.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-10-19T07:01:24Z) - Invariant Rationalization [84.1861516092232]
A typical rationalization criterion, i.e. maximum mutual information (MMI), finds the rationale that maximizes the prediction performance based only on the rationale.
We introduce a game-theoretic invariant rationalization criterion where the rationales are constrained to enable the same predictor to be optimal across different environments.
We show both theoretically and empirically that the proposed rationales can rule out spurious correlations, generalize better to different test scenarios, and align better with human judgments.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-03-22T00:50:27Z) - SetRank: A Setwise Bayesian Approach for Collaborative Ranking from
Implicit Feedback [50.13745601531148]
We propose a novel setwise Bayesian approach for collaborative ranking, namely SetRank, to accommodate the characteristics of implicit feedback in recommender system.
Specifically, SetRank aims at maximizing the posterior probability of novel setwise preference comparisons.
We also present the theoretical analysis of SetRank to show that the bound of excess risk can be proportional to $sqrtM/N$.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-02-23T06:40:48Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.