-optimal for rank aggregation.

-   Star-like graph: We choose one item to be the center, and every offer set consists of this center node and a set of $\kappa-1$ other nodes chosen uniformly at random without replacement. For example, center node = $\{1\}$, $S_1=\{1,2,\ldots,\kappa\}$ and $S_2=\{1,\kappa+1,\kappa+2,\ldots,2\kappa-1\}$, etc. $n$ is chosen in the way similar to that of the Chain graph. Standard spectral analysis shows that $\alpha=\Theta(1)$ and star-like graphs are near-optimal for rank-aggregation.

-   Barbell-like graph: We select an offering $S = \{S',i,j\}$, $|S'| = \kappa-2$ uniformly at random and divide rest of the items into two groups $V_1$ and $V_2$. We offer set $S$ $n\kappa/d$ times. For each offering of set $S$, we offer $d/\kappa -1$ sets chosen uniformly at random from the two groups $\{V_1,i\}$ and $\{V_2,j\}$. The resulting graph is a barbell-like graph, and standard spectral analysis shows that $\alpha=\Theta(1/d^2)$. Hence, a chain graph is strictly sub-optimal for rank aggregation.

Figure \[fig:topology\] illustrates how graph topology effects the accuracy. When $\theta^*$ is chosen uniformly at random, the accuracy does not change with $d$ (left), and the accuracy is better for those graphs with larger spectral gap. However, for a certain worst-case $\theta^*$, the error increases with $d$ for the chain graph and the barbell-like graph, as predicted by the above analysis of the spectral gap. We use $\ell = 4$, $\kappa = 17$ and vary $d$ from $129$ to $2049$. $\kappa$ is kept small to make the resulting graphs more like the above discussed graphs. Figure on left shows accuracy when $\theta^*$ is chosen i.i.d. uniformly over $[-b,b]$ with $b=2$. Error in this case is roughly same for each of the graph topologies with chain graph being the worst. However, when $\theta^*$ is chosen carefully error for chain graph and barbell-like graph increases with $d$ as shown
-optimal for rank aggregation. 

 -    Star - like graph: We choose one item to be the plaza, and every crack set consists of this center lymph node and a set of $ \kappa-1 $ early nodes chosen uniformly at random without refilling. For exercise, center lymph node = $ \{1\}$, $ S_1=\{1,2,\ldots,\kappa\}$ and $ S_2=\{1,\kappa+1,\kappa+2,\ldots,2\kappa-1\}$, etc. $ n$ is choose in the way exchangeable to that of the Chain graph. Standard spectral analysis indicate that $ \alpha=\Theta(1)$ and star - like graphs are near - optimal for rank and file - aggregation. 

 -    Barbell - like graph: We select an offering $ S = \{S',i, j\}$, $ |S'| = \kappa-2 $ uniformly at random and separate rest of the items into two groups $ V_1 $ and $ V_2$. We offer put $ S$ $ n\kappa / d$ times. For each offering of set $ S$, we offer $ d/\kappa -1 $ sets chosen uniformly at random from the two group $ \{V_1,i\}$ and $ \{V_2,j\}$. The resulting graph is a barbell - like graph, and standard spectral analysis shows that $ \alpha=\Theta(1 / d^2)$. Hence, a chain graph is strictly sub - optimal for rank aggregation. 

 Figure \[fig: topology\ ] illustrates how graph topology effects the accuracy. When $ \theta^*$ is chosen uniformly at random, the accuracy does not change with $ d$ (left), and the accuracy is better for those graphs with bigger spectral gap. However, for a sealed bad - casing $ \theta^*$, the error increases with $ d$ for the range graph and the barbell - like graph, as predicted by the above psychoanalysis of the spectral gap. We use $ \ell = 4 $, $ \kappa = 17 $ and change $ d$ from $ 129 $ to $ 2049$. $ \kappa$ is kept small to make the resulting graphs more like the above discussed graphs. Figure on left shows accuracy when $ \theta^*$ is chosen i.i.d. uniformly over $ [ -b, b]$ with $ b=2$. mistake in this case is approximately like for each of the graph topology with chain graph being the worst. However, when $ \theta^*$ is chosen cautiously error for chain graph and barbell - like graph increases with $ d$ as shown
-optlmal for rank aggregatiok.

-   Star-like grakh: We chmose ohe item go be the center, and every ohfer set xonsists of this centef node anf a set if $\keppa-1$ other nodes chosen muiforjpy ac candom without teplacement. Xor example, cettdr node = $\{1\}$, $S_1=\{1,2,\ldots,\kappa\}$ and $S_2=\{1,\kappa+1,\kappa+2,\jdots,2\kalpw-1\}$, etc. $n$ is chofen pn the way similar to that of the Chain fraph. Suandard spectral amalysis shows that $\alpha=\Thfta(1)$ wnd star-like graphd are near-okfimwo for rank-ageregation.

-   Barbell-likg graph: We select an offering $S = \{S',i,j\}$, $|X'| = \kappa-2$ ubidorlny at randon and divide rest of the htems imto two groups $V_1$ end $C_2$. We offer set $S$ $n\kap'a/d$ times. For each osfering ox aet $S$, we offer $d/\kqppa -1$ sgts cvosev unkfodmky at rajdoj from the two groups $\{V_1,i\}$ and $\{V_2,j\}$. The resuktybg graph is a barbejl-jike graph, and standard spectral analysps sgows that $\alpha=\Theta(1/d^2)$. Hwnce, a chain graph is strictly sub-optimal for rank aggregation.

Figure \[fig:topologf\] illnsgrauew how trwph topology effects the accuracy. When $\theta^*$ ya vhpsen uniformly at random, yhf sscuracy does vot chchgs with $d$ (left), and hhe accoracy us better for those graphs with larger spectral gap. Kowwver, for a certain worst-case $\cheta^*$, jhe ertor increases with $d$ fox the dhain graph and the gxrbell-like graph, as psedicted by the above analrsis of tie spzctral gxp. Wg use $\ejl = 4$, $\kappa = 17$ and vary $d$ from $129$ to $2049$. $\nappa$ iv kept smapl to make the resulting graphs more like the atovv discusszd graihs. Figure on lqft shows accutacy when $\thetx^*$ is choseh i.i.d. uiiformly ovew $[-b,b]$ with $b=2$. Estor in this cese is rotghlt sane for dxch of the gralh topoloynes with xhain graph being bhe wudst. However, wheu $\uhwta^*$ is chosen vardfujlj ecror smr chain gra[h avd csrbelu-like graph kncrrases with $d$ as showt
-optimal for rank aggregation. - Star-like graph: one to be center, and every center and a set $\kappa-1$ other nodes uniformly at random without replacement. For center node = $\{1\}$, $S_1=\{1,2,\ldots,\kappa\}$ and $S_2=\{1,\kappa+1,\kappa+2,\ldots,2\kappa-1\}$, etc. $n$ is chosen in the similar to that of the Chain graph. Standard spectral analysis shows that $\alpha=\Theta(1)$ star-like are for - Barbell-like graph: We select an offering $S = \{S',i,j\}$, $|S'| = \kappa-2$ uniformly at random divide rest of the items into two groups and $V_2$. We offer $S$ $n\kappa/d$ times. For each of $S$, we $d/\kappa sets uniformly at random the two groups $\{V_1,i\}$ and $\{V_2,j\}$. The resulting graph is a barbell-like graph, and standard spectral analysis that $\alpha=\Theta(1/d^2)$. chain graph strictly for aggregation. Figure \[fig:topology\] graph topology effects the accuracy. When uniformly at random, the accuracy does not change $d$ (left), the accuracy is better for those with larger spectral gap. However, for a certain $\theta^*$, the error increases with $d$ for the chain graph and the barbell-like graph, as the above analysis of spectral gap. We $\ell 4$, = and vary from $129$ to $2049$. $\kappa$ is kept small to make the graphs more like the above discussed graphs. Figure on left when is chosen i.i.d. over $[-b,b]$ with $b=2$. in case is roughly same of graph graph the However, when $\theta^*$ is carefully error for chain graph barbell-like graph increases with
-optimal for rank aggregation.

-   star-like grAph: We ChoOse OnE iteM to bE the center, and eVEry oFfer set consists of this cEnter NoDE and A SeT of $\kaPpa-1$ otheR NoDES chOsEn UniFoRMlY at raNdoM withouT replacemeNt. FOr Example, centeR NoDe = $\{1\}$, $S_1=\{1,2,\ldots,\kaPpa\}$ And $S_2=\{1,\kappa+1,\kapPa+2,\lDots,2\kaPpA-1\}$, etC. $N$ is chOseN in thE way siMIlar to That of the chAIn grapH. standarD SPeCtraL analysis shows thaT $\AlPHa=\Theta(1)$ and star-Like grApHS aRE NeaR-opTimal for raNk-AggreGAtion.

-   BaRBeLL-LIke GRaph: We select aN offering $S = \{S',I,J\}$, $|S'| = \kAppa-2$ unIfOrmLY at ranDom anD dIVidE rest of the iTems Into two grOups $V_1$ aND $V_2$. We offER set $S$ $n\kAppa/d$ tImeS. FoR eacH OfFeRinG oF Set $s$, We OffER $d/\kAppa -1$ sets ChOsEn uniFormLY AT RandOm fRom tHe two Groups $\{V_1,i\}$ and $\{V_2,j\}$. the ResuLTinG grapH is a bArbeLl-Like gRaph, anD stanDaRd spectral analySis sHows that $\aLphA=\THetA(1/d^2)$. hence, A Chain gRapH is StrictlY sub-optIMal FoR RANk Aggregation.

Figure \[fIg:TOPoLogy\] illuStrateS HoW gRAph topolOgY efFectS THe accUracY. whEn $\theta^*$ iS choseN UnIfOrmly at RaNdom, thE aCcuRacY does NOt chAnge wiTh $d$ (left), aNd the ACcuracy is betteR For those graphS WiTH LaRGer sPecTral gap. HoweVer, fOR a ceRtaiN WoRst-CAse $\thEta^*$, thE eRRoR Increases with $d$ for thE cHain grAph anD the barbell-liKe graph, as pREDIcted by tHe abOVe ANalysis of the spEctraL gap. We use $\eLL = 4$, $\kappa = 17$ anD vary $D$ from $129$ to $2049$. $\kAppa$ is kepT SMall to maKe tHe rEsuLtiNG GrAphs more like tHE AbovE dIscusseD grAphs. FigUre On lEft ShoWs Accuracy wHen $\theta^*$ Is ChOsEn I.i.d. UnifoRMly over $[-b,B]$ wIth $B=2$. ERroR in thIS case iS rougHly sAmE fOR eaCh of the GRaPH TopoLoGiEs wiTh cHaIn graPh beINg tHe worst. however, whEn $\tHEta^*$ iS cHoSen careFully error for ChAin graph anD bArbEll-likE GRaph incrEases with $d$ as shown
-optimal for rank aggregat ion.

-  Star- lik e g ra ph:We c hoose one item to b e the center, and ever y off er setc on sists  of thi s  c e n ter  n od e a nd aset o f $ \kappa- 1$ other n ode schosen unifo r ml y at rando m w ithout repla cem ent. F or  ex a mple,  ce nternode = $\{1\} $, $S_1=\ {1 , 2,\ldo t s,\kapp a \ }$  and  $S_2=\{1,\kappa+ 1 ,\ k appa+2,\ldots, 2\kapp a- 1 \} $ ,  et c.$n$ is cho se n int he ways im i l a r t o  that of theChain graph .  St andard  s pec t ral an alysi ss how s that $\al pha= \Theta(1) $ ands tar-lik e  graphs  are n ear -op tima l  f or  ra nk - agg r eg ati o n.
-   Bar be ll -like  gra p h : We s ele ct a n off ering $S = \{ S', i,j\ } $,$|S'|  = \k appa -2 $ uni formly  at r an dom and dividerest  of the i tem sint otwo g r oups $ V_1 $ a nd $V_2 $. We o f fer  s e t $S $ $n\kappa/d$ time s. F or  each of fering of  s e t $S$, w eoff er $ d / \kapp a -1 $  s ets chos en uni f or ml y at ra nd om fro mthe  tw o gro u ps $ \{V_1, i\}$ and  $\{V _ 2,j\}$. The re s ulting graphi sa ba r bell -li ke graph, a nd s t anda rd s p ec tra l  anal ysissh o ws that $\alpha=\Theta (1 /d^2)$ . Hen ce, a chain g raph is st r i c tly sub- opti m al for rank aggre gatio n.

Figure \[fig:to polog y\] illu strates h o w  graph t opo log y e ffe c t sthe accuracy. W hen$\ theta^* $ i s chose n u nif orm lyat  random,the accu ra cy  d oe s n ot ch a nge with  $ d$(l eft ), an d  the a ccura cy i sbe t ter  for th o se g raph swi th l arg er  spec tral gap . Howev er, for a  ce r tain  w or st-case  $\theta^*$,th e error in cr eas es wit h $d$ forthe chain graph and the barbell -li ke gr aph,  as predi cte d by t hea bove a nalysi s ofth e s p e ctral g ap . W euse $\ell= 4$,  $\ka pp a =17$ and  vary $d$ from $12 9 $ t o $2049$. $\k app a$ i s ke pts ma l l t om ake t he resulting gr aphs moreli k ethe aboved isc us sed gra phs. Fi gureo n leftshows acc uracy whe n$\th e t a^* $ is chose n i.i.d.  uniforml y  over $[ -b,b] $ w ith $b =2 $.Error  in th i s c ase i s roug hl y same  forea ch of th e graph topologies with  chain  grap h b eing thewor s t.However,when  $\theta^* $ i s c hosen  ca r efull y er r or  fo r  chai n gr a ph and ba r be ll- l i ke  graph incr e a s eswith$d$ as sho wn
-optimal for_rank aggregation.

-_  Star-like graph:_We choose_one_item to_be_the center, and_every offer set_consists of this center_node and a_set_of $\kappa-1$ other nodes chosen uniformly at random without replacement. For example, center node_=_$\{1\}$, $S_1=\{1,2,\ldots,\kappa\}$_and_$S_2=\{1,\kappa+1,\kappa+2,\ldots,2\kappa-1\}$,_etc. $n$ is chosen in_the way similar to that_of the_Chain graph. Standard spectral analysis shows that $\alpha=\Theta(1)$_and_star-like graphs are_near-optimal for rank-aggregation.

-   Barbell-like graph: We select_an offering $S = \{S',i,j\}$, $|S'|_= \kappa-2$ uniformly_at_random_and divide rest of_the items into two groups $V_1$_and $V_2$. We offer set $S$_$n\kappa/d$ times. For each offering of set_$S$, we offer $d/\kappa -1$ sets_chosen uniformly at random from_the two_groups $\{V_1,i\}$ and $\{V_2,j\}$. The_resulting graph is_a barbell-like_graph, and standard_spectral analysis shows that $\alpha=\Theta(1/d^2)$. Hence,_a chain graph_is strictly sub-optimal for rank aggregation.

Figure_\[fig:topology\]_illustrates how graph_topology_effects_the accuracy._When $\theta^*$ is_chosen_uniformly at_random,_the accuracy does not change with_$d$_(left), and the accuracy is better for_those graphs with larger_spectral_gap. However, for a_certain worst-case $\theta^*$, the error_increases with $d$ for the chain_graph and_the barbell-like_graph, as predicted by the above analysis of the spectral gap._We use $\ell = 4$, $\kappa_= 17$ and vary_$d$ from_$129$_to $2049$. $\kappa$_is_kept small_to make the resulting graphs more like_the above_discussed graphs. Figure on left shows_accuracy when $\theta^*$ is_chosen_i.i.d. uniformly over $[-b,b]$ with $b=2$._Error in this case is roughly_same for each of the_graph_topologies_with chain graph being the_worst. However, when $\theta^*$ is chosen_carefully error for_chain graph and barbell-like graph increases with_$d$_as shown