mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Guiding Worker Self-Selection in Crowdsourcing Contests: An LLM-Augmented Algorithmic Approach

arXiv 2609.07749 ↗First posted 7 Sep 2026cs.LG cs.GTcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Crowdsourcing platforms coordinate large pools of online workers who strategically choose which contests to enter and how much effort to invest. This self-selection can leave important contests with too few participants or too little effort, while workers may regret entering contests that leave them worse off than available alternatives. We study how platforms can recommend contests to workers using self-selection in Tullock contests (SSTC), a two-stage model in which workers first choose contests and then compete within them. We introduce GRAF, a greedy polynomial-time framework that constructs self-selection outcomes by ordering workers according to a score vector, with guarantees of zero worker regret and platform optimality in special cases of SSTC. Because effective orderings are difficult to design under worker heterogeneity, we propose LLMScore, an LLM-driven evolutionary framework that automatically designs GRAF's scoring algorithm. LLMScore addresses two challenges: jointly optimizing platform utility and worker satisfaction, and evaluating worker regret when exact computation is intractable. Trained only on small instances of one setting, it transfers to larger and structurally different settings; moreover, its output is human-readable code that platform operators can inspect and modify. Across 1,000 synthetic instances spanning four settings, GRAF with LLMScore consistently achieves high-quality, often near-optimal, outcomes with low worker regret, benefiting both platforms and workers.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Sep 2026.

Builds on

11 of 53 references.

References · 11

  1. 2024A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 646
  2. 2023Playing repeated games with Large Language Modelscited by 213
  3. 2023AnnoLLM: Making Large Language Models to Be Better Crowdsourced Annotatorscited by 171
  4. 2025Monte Carlo Tree Search for Comprehensive Exploration in LLM-Based Automatic Heuristic Designcited by 100
  5. 2024Social Choice Should Guide AI Alignment in Dealing with Diverse Human Feedbackcited by 95
  6. 2024A Systematic Survey on Large Language Models for Algorithm Designcited by 65
  7. 2023Generative Social Choicecited by 43
  8. 2024TokenSHAP: Interpreting Large Language Models with Monte Carlo Shapley Value Estimationcited by 41
  9. 2025LLM Economist: Large Population Models and Mechanism Design in Multi-Agent Generative Simulacracited by 20
  10. 2024Human vs. Generative AI in Content Creation Competition: Symbiosis or Conflict?cited by 13
  11. 2024Reinforcement Nash Equilibrium Solvercited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.