# MC-FLP on P&R-NYC Dataset (test) Source: [MC-FLP on P&R-NYC Dataset (test)]() Collection index: [llms.txt]() Data updated: 2026-02-26T05:46:05.188Z Evaluation of model performance on the MC-FLP task using the test split of the P&R-NYC Dataset, focusing on average choice probabilities across client segments. A research result applies to its stated dataset, split, metric and evaluation configuration. Compare like-for-like settings, preserve the metric's unit and direction, and distinguish paper-reported results from independent reproduction. The best result recorded here is not a claim of exhaustive, current global coverage. | Scope | Recorded value | | --- | --- | | Task | MC-FLP | | Dataset (including any stated split) | P&R-NYC Dataset (test) | | Metric | H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%) | | Unit | PERCENT | | Direction | Higher is better | | Results loaded | 12 of 12 | | Coverage | All results currently returned for this benchmark | Evaluation settings may differ between results. The original papers and recorded configurations are needed to establish comparability. A shared metric name alone does not establish an identical protocol. ## Metrics - [H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%)](): Higher is better; unit: PERCENT. - [A (Avg Choice Prob, All Clients)](): Higher is better; unit: PERCENT. ## Recorded results | Method | H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%) | Result date | Report paper | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Clustering Approach | 53.9 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | | Clustering Approach | 53.3 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | | Clustering Approach | 53.1 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | | ERM | 46.9 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | | Clustering Approach | 46.9 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | | ERM | 42.6 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | | Clustering Approach | 42.6 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | | Clustering Approach | 42.5 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | | Clustering Approach | 41.8 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | | Clustering Approach | 41.8 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | | Clustering Approach | 41.7 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | | ERM | 17.5 | Not recorded | 68fa59541e209131ce9b5eca | ### Clustering Approach H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 53.9. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb770526f. [Reporting paper]() [Method origin paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":14,"Regularization parameter (xi)":"1E4"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. ### Clustering Approach H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 53.3. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb770526e. [Reporting paper]() [Method origin paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":14,"Regularization parameter (xi)":"1E3"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. ### Clustering Approach H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 53.1. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb770526b. [Reporting paper]() [Method origin paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":12,"Regularization parameter (xi)":"1E4"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. ### ERM H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 46.9. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb770526c. [Reporting paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":14}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. ### Clustering Approach H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 46.9. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb770526d. [Reporting paper]() [Method origin paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":14,"Regularization parameter (xi)":"1E2"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. ### ERM H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 42.6. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb7705268. [Reporting paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":12}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. ### Clustering Approach H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 42.6. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb7705269. [Reporting paper]() [Method origin paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":12,"Regularization parameter (xi)":"1E2"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. ### Clustering Approach H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 42.5. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb770526a. [Reporting paper]() [Method origin paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":12,"Regularization parameter (xi)":"1E3"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. ### Clustering Approach H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 41.8. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb7705265. [Reporting paper]() [Method origin paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":10,"Regularization parameter (xi)":"1E2"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. ### Clustering Approach H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 41.8. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb7705266. [Reporting paper]() [Method origin paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":10,"Regularization parameter (xi)":"1E3"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. ### Clustering Approach H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 41.7. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb7705267. [Reporting paper]() [Method origin paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":10,"Regularization parameter (xi)":"1E4"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. ### ERM H (Avg Choice Prob, Bottom 5%): 17.5. Result ID: 698ba64b7a967eddb7705264. [Reporting paper]() Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Number of facilities (m)":10}. This record does not assert independent reproduction. Page 1 of 1. This is an index page, not the full collection.