Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Andrew Conway

dblp:188/6419 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · unresolved

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › proportional representation
single transferable vote
0.412020
Did That Lost Ballot Box Cost Me a Seat? Computing Manipulations of STV Elections · AAAI 2020
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
social choice
0.412020
Did That Lost Ballot Box Cost Me a Seat? Computing Manipulations of STV Elections · AAAI 2020
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
voting
0.412020
Did That Lost Ballot Box Cost Me a Seat? Computing Manipulations of STV Elections · AAAI 2020
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice
voting manipulation
0.412020
Did That Lost Ballot Box Cost Me a Seat? Computing Manipulations of STV Elections · AAAI 2020
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2020 Did That Lost Ballot Box Cost Me a Seat? Computing Manipulations of STV Elections
abstract
Mistakes made by humans, or machines, commonly arise when managing ballots cast in an election. In the 2013 Australian Federal Election, for example, 1,370 West Australian Senate ballots were lost, eventually leading to a costly re-run of the election. Other mistakes include ballots that are misrecorded by electronic voting systems, voters that cast invalid ballots, or vote multiple times at different polling locations. We present a method for assessing whether such problems could have made a difference to the outcome of a Single Transferable Vote (STV) election – a complex system of preferential voting for multi-seat elections. It is used widely in Australia, in Ireland, and in a range of local government elections in the United Kingdom and United States.
Michelle L. Blom, Andrew Conway, Peter J. Stuckey, Vanessa Teague
AAAI2