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

Anton Baychkov

dblp:266/5455 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
—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 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 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 · 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 › participatory budgeting
method of equal shares
1.012026
Utilitarian Guarantees for the Method of Equal Shares · AAAI 2026
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
participatory budgeting
1.012026
Utilitarian Guarantees for the Method of Equal Shares · AAAI 2026
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
social choice
1.012026
Utilitarian Guarantees for the Method of Equal Shares · AAAI 2026
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › preference aggregation
utilitarian welfare
1.012026
Utilitarian Guarantees for the Method of Equal Shares · AAAI 2026
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Utilitarian Guarantees for the Method of Equal Shares
abstract
In recent years, research in Participatory Budgeting (PB) has put a greater emphasis on rules satisfying notions of fairness and proportionality, with the Method of Equal Shares (MES) being a prominent example. However, proportionality can come at a cost to the total utilitarian welfare. Our work formalizes this relationship, by deriving minimum utilitarian welfare guarantees for MES for a subclass of satisfaction functions called DNS functions, which includes two of the most popular ways of measuring a voter’s utility in the PB setting: considering (1) the total cost of approved projects or (2) the total number of those projects. Our results are parameterized in terms of minimum and maximum project costs, which allows us to improve on the mostly negative results found in prior studies, and reduce to the existing multiwinner guarantee when project costs are equal. We show that our guarantees are asymptotically tight for rules satisfying Extended Justified Representation up to one project, showing that no proportional rule can achieve a better utilitarian guarantee than MES.
Anton Baychkov, Markus Brill, Jannik Peters 0001
AAAI1