  Peer prediction mechanisms incentivize agents to truthfully report their
signals even in the absence of verification by comparing agents' reports with
those of their peers. In the detail-free multi-task setting, agents respond to
multiple independent and identically distributed tasks, and the mechanism does
not know the prior distribution of agents' signals. The goal is to provide an
$\epsilon$-strongly truthful mechanism where truth-telling rewards agents
"strictly" more than any other strategy profile (with $\epsilon$ additive
error), and to do so while requiring as few tasks as possible. We design a
family of mechanisms with a scoring function that maps a pair of reports to a
score. The mechanism is strongly truthful if the scoring function is "prior
ideal," and $\epsilon$-strongly truthful as long as the scoring function is
sufficiently close to the ideal one. This reduces the above mechanism design
problem to a learning problem -- specifically learning an ideal scoring
function. We leverage this reduction to obtain the following three results. 1)
We show how to derive good bounds on the number of tasks required for different
types of priors. Our reduction applies to myriad continuous signal space
settings. This is the first peer-prediction mechanism on continuous signals
designed for the multi-task setting. 2) We show how to turn a soft-predictor of
an agent's signals (given the other agents' signals) into a mechanism. This
allows the practical use of machine learning algorithms that give good results
even when many agents provide noisy information. 3) For finite signal spaces,
we obtain $\epsilon$-strongly truthful mechanisms on any stochastically
relevant prior, which is the maximal possible prior. In contrast, prior work
only achieves a weaker notion of truthfulness (informed truthfulness) or
requires stronger assumptions on the prior.
