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

Robert Gomez

dblp:285/6682 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 1 · 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 · 67% Approximation and online algorithms · 33%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
information elicitation
0.512021
Efficient Competitions and Online Learning with Strategic Forecasters · EC 2021
Approximation and online algorithms
online learning
0.512021
Efficient Competitions and Online Learning with Strategic Forecasters · EC 2021
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
truthful mechanism
0.512021
Efficient Competitions and Online Learning with Strategic Forecasters · EC 2021

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

online learning · 0.5mechanism design · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2021 Efficient Competitions and Online Learning with Strategic Forecasters
abstract
Winner-take-all competitions in forecasting and machine-learning suffer from distorted incentives. [23] identified this problem and proposed ELF, a truthful mechanism to select a winner. We show that, from a pool of n forecasters, ELF requires Θ(nłog n) events or test data points to select a near-optimal forecaster with high probability. We then show that standard online learning algorithms select an ε-optimal forecaster using only O(łog(n) / ε2) events, by way of a strong approximate-truthfulness guarantee. This bound matches the best possible even in the nonstrategic setting. We then apply these mechanisms to obtain the first no-regret guarantee for non-myopic strategic experts.
Rafael M. Frongillo, Robert Gomez, Anish Thilagar, Bo Waggoner
EC2