Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Solidago: A Modular Collaborative Scoring Pipeline

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2211.01179 v3 pith:UGFM3VTO submitted 2022-10-30 cs.SI cs.CRcs.GT

classification cs.SIcs.CRcs.GT
keywords modelspipelinescoressolidagotrustuseruserscollaborative
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

This paper presents Solidago, an end-to-end modular pipeline to allow any community of users to collaboratively score any number of entities. Solidago proposes a six-module decomposition. First, it uses pretrust and peer-to-peer vouches to assign trust scores to users. Second, based on participation, trust scores are turned into voting rights per user per entity. Third, for each user, a preference model is learned from the user's evaluation data. Fourth, users' models are put on a similar scale. Fifth, these models are securely aggregated. Sixth, models are post-processed to yield human-readable global scores. We also propose default implementations of the six modules, including a novel trust propagation algorithm, and adaptations of state-of-the-art scaling and aggregation solutions. Our pipeline has been successfully deployed on the open-source platform tournesol.app. We thereby lay an appealing foundation for the collaborative, effective, scalable, fair, interpretable and secure scoring of any set of entities.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Case for Specialisation in Non-Human Entities

    cs.CY 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A position paper making the case that specialised, well-specified AI systems are more robust, secure, and governable than general-purpose AGI systems, and that hard-to-specify tasks need specified governance.

Pith tools