arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
北美退伍军人节(Veterans Day),12 日无更新
arXiv 1709.02063cs.IR
收藏

为多样性和质量排名的想法

Ranking ideas for diversity and quality

Faez Ahmed, Mark Fuge

摘要:

当选择想法或试图寻找灵感时,设计师通常必须筛选数百或数千个想法。本文提供了一种算法,排名的设计思想,使排名表同时最大限度地提高质量和多样性的建议设计。要做到这一点,我们首先定义和比较两个多样性措施,使用决定性点过程(DPP)和添加剂子模块功能。我们发现,DPP更适合于以文本形式表示的项目,并且贪心算法使排名多样化,同时具有理论保证和经验性能,否则这是一个NP难问题。为了产生这样的排名,本文贡献了一种新的方式来扩展质量和多样性指标从集合排列的排名列表。这些排名指标开辟了使用多目标优化来描述排序列表中的多样性和质量之间的权衡。我们使用这样的权衡阵线,以帮助设计师选择排名使用无差异曲线。然而,我们还表明,权衡前沿的排名共享一些排名靠前的项目;这意味着审查项目(对于给定的深度,如前10名)从整个多样性到质量的前沿只会导致所考虑的设计数量略有增加。虽然所提出的技术是通用的,足以跨域使用,我们展示了具体的性能选择项目在一个在线设计社区(OpenIDEO),我们的方法减少了审查不同的,高质量的想法所需的时间从大约25小时到90分钟。这使得对群体产生的想法的评估对于单个设计师来说是容易的。我们的代码是公开的,可供进一步研究。

英文摘要:

When selecting ideas or trying to find inspiration, designers often must sift through hundreds or thousands of ideas. This paper provides an algorithm to rank design ideas such that the ranked list simultaneously maximizes the quality and diversity of recommended designs. To do so, we first define and compare two diversity measures using Determinantal Point Processes (DPP) and additive sub-modular functions. We show that DPPs are more suitable for items expressed as text and that a greedy algorithm diversifies rankings with both theoretical guarantees and empirical performance on what is otherwise an NP-Hard problem. To produce such rankings, this paper contributes a novel way to extend quality and diversity metrics from sets to permutations of ranked lists. These rank metrics open up the use of multi-objective optimization to describe trade-offs between diversity and quality in ranked lists. We use such trade-off fronts to help designers select rankings using indifference curves. However, we also show that rankings on trade-off front share a number of top-ranked items; this means reviewing items (for a given depth like the top 10) from across the entire diversity-to-quality front incurs only a marginal increase in the number of designs considered. While the proposed techniques are general purpose enough to be used across domains, we demonstrate concrete performance on selecting items in an online design community (OpenIDEO), where our approach reduces the time required to review diverse, high-quality ideas from around 25 hours to 90 minutes. This makes evaluation of crowd-generated ideas tractable for a single designer. Our code is publicly accessible for further research.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑