  A project (e.g. writing a collaborative research paper) is often a group
effort. At the end, each contributor identifies his or her contribution, often
verbally. The reward, however, is quite often financial in nature. This leads
to the question of what (percentage) share in the creation of the paper is due
to individual authors. Different authors may have various opinions on the
matter, and, even worse, their opinions may have different relevance. In this
paper, we present a simple models that allows aggregation of experts' opinions
linking the priority of his preference directly to the assessment made by other
experts. In this approach, the greater the contribution of a given expert, the
greater the importance of his opinion. The presented method can be considered
as an attempt to find consensus among a group of peers involved in the same
project. Hence, its applications may go beyond the proposed study example of
writing a scientific paper.
