Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Shubham Chowdhary
dblp:261/1380
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021
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 · 61% Distributed computing theory · 30% Mathematical optimization · 9% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
influence maximization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Fairness in Social Influence Maximization via Optimal Transport · NeurIPS 2024 |
Distributed computing theory
information dissemination |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Fairness in Social Influence Maximization via Optimal Transport · NeurIPS 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
social networks |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Fairness in Social Influence Maximization via Optimal Transport · NeurIPS 2024 |
Mathematical optimization
optimal transport |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Fairness in Social Influence Maximization via Optimal Transport · NeurIPS 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
seed selection · 0.8optimal transport · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Fairness in Social Influence Maximization via Optimal TransportabstractWe study fairness in social influence maximization, whereby one seeks to select
seeds that spread a given information throughout a network, ensuring balanced
outreach among different communities (e.g. demographic groups). In the literature,
fairness is often quantified in terms of the expected outreach within individual
communities. In this paper, we demonstrate that such fairness metrics can be
misleading since they overlook the stochastic nature of information diffusion
processes. When information diffusion occurs in a probabilistic manner, multiple
outreach scenarios can occur. As such, outcomes such as “In 50% of the cases, no
one in group 1 gets the information, while everyone in group 2 does, and in the
other 50%, it is the opposite”, which always results in largely unfair outcomes,
are classified as fair by a variety of fairness metrics in the literature. We tackle
this problem by designing a new fairness metric, mutual fairness, that captures
variability in outreach through optimal transport theory. We propose a new seed-
selection algorithm that optimizes both outreach and mutual fairness, and we show
its efficacy on several real datasets. We find that our algorithm increases fairness
with only a minor decrease (and at times, even an increase) in efficiency. Shubham Chowdhary, Giulia De Pasquale, Nicolas Lanzetti, Ana-Andreea Stoica, Florian Dörfler |
NeurIPS | 1 |