Spectral Ranking Inferences based on General Multiway Comparisons
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper studies the performance of the spectral method in the estimation and uncertainty quantification of the unobserved preference scores of compared entities in a general and more realistic setup. Specifically, the comparison graph consists of hyper-edges of possible heterogeneous sizes, and the number of comparisons can be as low as one for a given hyper-edge. Such a setting is pervasive in real applications, circumventing the need to specify the graph randomness and the restrictive homogeneous sampling assumption imposed in the commonly used Bradley-Terry-Luce (BTL) or Plackett-Luce (PL) models. Furthermore, in scenarios where the BTL or PL models are appropriate, we unravel the relationship between the spectral estimator and the Maximum Likelihood Estimator (MLE). We discover that a two-step spectral method, where we apply the optimal weighting estimated from the equal weighting vanilla spectral method, can achieve the same asymptotic efficiency as the MLE. Given the asymptotic distributions of the estimated preference scores, we also introduce a comprehensive framework to carry out both one-sample and two-sample ranking inferences, applicable to both fixed and random graph settings. It is noteworthy that this is the first time effective two-sample rank testing methods have been proposed. Finally, we substantiate our findings via comprehensive numerical simulations and subsequently apply our developed methodologies to perform statistical inferences for statistical journals and movie rankings.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Aug 2023.
Builds on
13 of 49 references.
References · 13
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2015Estimation from Pairwise Comparisons: Sharp Minimax Bounds with Topology Dependencecited by 61
- 2017Spectral Method and Regularized MLE Are Both Optimal for Top-K Rankingcited by 47
- 2015Spectral MLE: Top-K Rank Aggregation from Pairwise Comparisonscited by 34
- 2021Uncertainty quantification in the Bradley-Terry-Luce modelcited by 29
- 2018Dynamic Assortment Optimization with Changing Contextual Informationcited by 28
- 2014Minimax-optimal Inference from Partial Rankingscited by 24
- 2022Ranking Inferences Based on the Top Choice of Multiway Comparisonscited by 22
- 2021Lagrangian Inference for Ranking Problemscited by 19
- 2022Uncertainty Quantification of MLE for Entity Ranking with Covariatescited by 16
- 2022Co-citation and Co-authorship Networks of Statisticianscited by 13
- 2021ℓ∞-Bounds of the MLE in the BTL Model under General Comparison Graphscited by 9
1 more
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 6; 2025: 3; 2026: 2.
11 papers.
- 2024Diffusion Model for Data-Driven Black-Box Optimizationcited by 24
- 2024The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Reviewcited by 8
- 2024Covariate Assisted Entity Ranking with Sparse Intrinsic Scorescited by 7
- 2025Contextual Online Uncertainty-Aware Preference Learning for Human Feedbackcited by 7
- 2024Statistical ranking with dynamic covariatescited by 6
- 2026Prompt-Dependent Ranking of Large Language Models with Uncertainty Quantificationcited by 4
- 2024Top-K ranking with a monotone adversarycited by 3
- 2024Random pairing MLE for estimation of item parameters in Rasch modelcited by 0
- 2025A theoretical guarantee for SyncRankcited by 0
- 2025From Authors to Reviewers: Leveraging Rankings to Improve Peer Reviewcited by 0
- 2026Bradley-Terry model under general comparison graphscited by 0
- 2026Bradley-Terry model under general comparison graphs5 Oct 2026
- 2026Prompt-Dependent Ranking of Large Language Models with Uncertainty Quantification11 Feb 2026
- 2025From Authors to Reviewers: Leveraging Rankings to Improve Peer Review26 Sep 2025
- 2025A theoretical guarantee for SyncRank26 Sep 2025
- 2025Contextual Online Uncertainty-Aware Preference Learning for Human Feedback27 Apr 2025
- 2024The ICML 2023 Ranking Experiment: Examining Author Self-Assessment in ML/AI Peer Review24 Aug 2024
- 2024Covariate Assisted Entity Ranking with Sparse Intrinsic Scores9 Jul 2024
- 2024Statistical ranking with dynamic covariates24 Jun 2024
- 2024Random pairing MLE for estimation of item parameters in Rasch model20 Jun 2024
- 2024Diffusion Model for Data-Driven Black-Box Optimization20 Mar 2024
- 2024Top-K ranking with a monotone adversary12 Feb 2024
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026MoPLEx: Estimating Plackett-Luce Mixture Models for Multi-Objective Alignment
- 2019Rank Aggregation via Heterogeneous Thurstone Preference Models
- 2026How Many Repeated Pairwise Comparisons Are Needed for Ranking under Heterogeneity?
- 2026Pairwise Reference Alignment as a Model-Level Ordinal Observable
- 2025SPECTRA: Revealing the Full Spectrum of User Preferences via Distributional LLM Inference
- 2025SP-Rank: A Dataset for Ranked Preferences with Secondary Information
- 2024Preference Learning Algorithms Do Not Learn Preference Rankings
- 2026Calibrated Preference Learning: The Case of Label Ranking