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

Shiri Alouf-Heffetz

dblp:324/2058 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
4as first author
6since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-5102-2467ORCID · verified

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 4 first-author · 6 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 5 · 4 first-author · 5 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
5 papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 84% Mathematical optimization · 12% Computational complexity · 4%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
2 papers
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100%

Topics — the 9 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice
liquid democracy
2.332025
The Cost Perspective of Liquid Democracy: Feasibility and Control · AAAI 2025
Optimizing Viscous Democracy · IJCAI 2024
Using Liquid Democracy For Attention-Aware Social Choice · IJCAI 2023
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
social choice
1.832023
Using Liquid Democracy For Attention-Aware Social Choice · IJCAI 2023
Better Collective Decisions via Uncertainty Reduction · IJCAI 2022
How Should We Vote? A Comparison of Voting Systems within Social Networks · IJCAI 2022
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
computational social choice
1.622025
The Cost Perspective of Liquid Democracy: Feasibility and Control · AAAI 2025
Optimizing Viscous Democracy · IJCAI 2024
Mathematical optimization
combinatorial optimization
0.812024
Optimizing Viscous Democracy · IJCAI 2024
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › preference aggregation
collective decision making
0.612022
Better Collective Decisions via Uncertainty Reduction · IJCAI 2022
Mathematical optimization › constrained optimization
budget-constrained optimization
0.312025
The Cost Perspective of Liquid Democracy: Feasibility and Control · AAAI 2025
Computational social science and digital humanities
social network
0.212022
How Should We Vote? A Comparison of Voting Systems within Social Networks · IJCAI 2022
Computational complexity › decision problems
decision problem complexity
0.212022
Better Collective Decisions via Uncertainty Reduction · IJCAI 2022
Computational complexity › parameterized complexity
fixed-parameter tractability
0.212022
Better Collective Decisions via Uncertainty Reduction · IJCAI 2022

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

computational complexity analysis · 1.3simulation · 1.1agent-based modeling · 1.1complexity analysis · 0.9approximation algorithm · 0.9parameterized complexity · 0.6NP-hardness · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 The Cost Perspective of Liquid Democracy: Feasibility and Control
abstract
We examine an approval-based model of Liquid Democracy with a budget constraint on voting and delegating costs, aiming to centrally select casting voters ensuring complete representation of the electorate. From a computational complexity perspective, we focus on minimizing overall costs, maintaining short delegation paths, and preventing excessive concentration of voting power. Furthermore, we explore computational aspects of strategic control, specifically, whether external agents can change election components to influence the voting power of certain voters.
Shiri Alouf-Heffetz, Lukasz Janeczko, Grzegorz Lisowski, Georgios Papasotiropoulos
AAAI1
2025 Query-Based Committee Selection
abstract
Purpose: Multiwinner voting rules typically require full knowledge of voter preferences, which becomes impractical in large-scale or attention-limited settings. This paper investigates how accurately a winning committee can be approximated when voter preferences are elicited using a limited budget of structured queries. Methods: We introduce a query-based framework for multiwinner elections in which voter preferences are elicited through refinement queries over subsets of candidates under a limited budget. We analyse several cost functions that model the cognitive effort needed to answer such queries, propose axiomatic properties for evaluating them, and experimentally evaluate simple query-based committee selection rules across multiple election models. Results: Experimental results show that strategies based on recursively splitting candidate sets provide the best trade-off between elicitation cost and committee accuracy. Across several statistical models, these strategies approximate the outcome of k-Borda elections significantly more efficiently than alternative query types. Conclusion: The results demonstrate that well-designed query strategies can substantially reduce the amount of preference information required while still producing high-quality committee outcomes, suggesting that query-based elicitation is a promising approach for scalable multiwinner decision-making.
Itay Asher Zimet, Shiri Alouf-Heffetz, Nimrod Talmon
EUMAS (1)2
2024 Optimizing Viscous Democracy
Ben Armstrong, Shiri Alouf-Heffetz, Nimrod Talmon
IJCAI2
2023 Using Liquid Democracy For Attention-Aware Social Choice
abstract
My PhD research deals with the use of Liquid Democracy (LD) for social choice scenarios, while considering the scarcity of attention as a driving factor. My aim is to better understand LD: theoretically as well as practically; in particular, by establishing containment in certain computational classes for corresponding combinatorial problems, suggesting methods to improve the use of LD, and understand its adaptation to specific scenarios. Concretely, I consider the use of LD as a solution for the problem of low voter attention in light of the high cognitive effort needed by voters to actively participate in voting processes.
Shiri Alouf-Heffetz
IJCAI1
2022 How Should We Vote? A Comparison of Voting Systems within Social Networks
abstract
Voting is a crucial methodology for eliciting and combining agents' preferences and information across many applications. Just as there are numerous voting rules exhibiting different properties, we also see many different voting systems. In this paper we investigate how different voting systems perform as a function of the characteristics of the underlying voting population and social network. In particular, we compare direct democracy, liquid democracy, and sortition in a ground truth voting context. Through simulations -- using both real and artificially generated social networks -- we illustrate how voter competency distributions and levels of direct participation affect group accuracy differently in each voting mechanism. Our results can be used to guide the selection of a suitable voting system based on the characteristics of a particular voting setting.
Shiri Alouf-Heffetz, Ben Armstrong, Kate Larson, Nimrod Talmon
IJCAI1
2022 Better Collective Decisions via Uncertainty Reduction
abstract
We consider an agent community wishing to decide on several binary issues by means of issue-by-issue majority voting. For each issue and each agent, one of the two options is better than the other. However, some of the agents may be confused about some of the issues, in which case they may vote for the option that is objectively worse for them. A benevolent external party wants to help the agents to make better decisions, i.e., select the majority-preferred option for as many issues as possible. This party may have one of the following tools at its disposal: (1) educating some of the agents, so as to enable them to vote correctly on all issues, (2) appointing a subset of highly competent agents to make decisions on behalf of the entire group, or (3) guiding the agents on how to delegate their votes to other agents, in a way that is consistent with the agents' opinions. For each of these tools, we study the complexity of the decision problem faced by this external party, obtaining both NP-hardness results and fixed-parameter tractability results.
Shiri Alouf-Heffetz, Laurent Bulteau, Edith Elkind, Nimrod Talmon, Nicholas Teh
IJCAI1