EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
John K. Lai
dblp:06/9923
· DBLP profile ↗
9ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 7 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 5Theory of computation · 3 · 1 first-authorApplied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 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
7 papers |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 88% Algorithms and data structures · 10% Mathematical optimization · 2% | |
| Computer networks
1 paper |
Network optimization and economics · 87% Network measurement and analytics · 13% |
Topics — the 13 heaviest of 16, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
fair division |
0.6 | 4 | 2013 | How to Cut a Cake Before the Party Ends · AAAI 2013 On Maxsum Fair Cake Divisions · AAAI 2012 Towards More Expressive Cake Cutting · IJCAI 2011 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › fair division
cake cutting |
0.5 | 4 | 2013 | How to Cut a Cake Before the Party Ends · AAAI 2013 On Maxsum Fair Cake Divisions · AAAI 2012 Towards More Expressive Cake Cutting · IJCAI 2011 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › fair division › cake cutting
envy-free cake cutting |
0.3 | 2 | 2013 | How to Cut a Cake Before the Party Ends · AAAI 2013 Optimal Envy-Free Cake Cutting · AAAI 2011 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
incentive compatibility |
0.3 | 2 | 2012 | Monotone branch-and-bound search for restricted combinatorial auctions · EC 2012 Payment rules through discriminant-based classifiers · EC 2012 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
mechanism design |
0.3 | 2 | 2012 | Monotone branch-and-bound search for restricted combinatorial auctions · EC 2012 Payment rules through discriminant-based classifiers · EC 2012 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › auction theory
combinatorial auction |
0.2 | 2 | 2012 | Monotone branch-and-bound search for restricted combinatorial auctions · EC 2012 Payment rules through discriminant-based classifiers · EC 2012 |
Network optimization and economics › mechanism design
credit systems |
0.1 | 1 | 2012 | Economics of BitTorrent communities · WWW 2012 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
monotonicity |
0.1 | 1 | 2012 | Monotone branch-and-bound search for restricted combinatorial auctions · EC 2012 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
truthful mechanism design |
0.1 | 1 | 2010 | Truth, Justice, and Cake Cutting · AAAI 2010 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › algorithmic mechanism design
approximation mechanisms |
0.0 | 1 | 2012 | Monotone branch-and-bound search for restricted combinatorial auctions · EC 2012 |
Mathematical optimization
multi-objective optimization |
0.0 | 1 | 2012 | On Maxsum Fair Cake Divisions · AAAI 2012 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
pareto optimality |
0.0 | 1 | 2012 | On Maxsum Fair Cake Divisions · AAAI 2012 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › incentive compatibility
strategyproofness |
0.0 | 1 | 2010 | Truth, Justice, and Cake Cutting · AAAI 2010 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
support vector machine · 0.1statistical machine learning · 0.1social welfare maximization · 0.1sensitivity analysis · 0.1natural experiments · 0.1measurement study · 0.1interviews · 0.1discriminant-based classification · 0.1branch-and-bound · 0.1approximation · 0.1tractable algorithms · 0.1preference modeling · 0.1randomized mechanism design · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | How to Cut a Cake Before the Party EndsabstractFor decades researchers have struggled with the problem of envy-free cake cutting: how to divide a divisible good between multiple agents so that each agent likes his own allocation best. Although an envy-free cake cutting protocol was ultimately devised, it is unbounded, in the sense that the number of operations can be arbitrarily large, depending on the preferences of the agents. We ask whether bounded protocols exist when the agents' preferences are restricted. Our main result is an envy-free cake cutting protocol for agents with piecewise linear valuations, which requires a number of operations that is polynomial in natural parameters of the given instance. David Kurokawa, John K. Lai, Ariel D. Procaccia |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2012 | On Maxsum Fair Cake DivisionsabstractWe consider the problem of selecting fair divisions of a heterogeneous divisible good among a set of agents. Recent work (Cohler et al., AAAI 2011) focused on designing algorithms for computing maxsum—social welfare maximizing—allocations under the fairness notion of envy-freeness. Maxsum allocations can also be found under alternative notions such as equitability. In this paper, we examine the properties of these allocations. In particular, We provide conditions for when maxsum envy-free or equitable allocations are Pareto optimal and give examples where fairness with Pareto optimality is not possible. We also prove that maxsum envy-free allocations have weakly greater welfare than maxsum equitable allocations when agents have structured valuations, and we derive an approximate version of this inequality for general valuations. Steven J. Brams, Michal Feldman, John K. Lai, Jamie Morgenstern, Ariel D. Procaccia |
AAAI | 3 |
| 2012 | Mechanisms and Impossibilities for Truthful, Envy-Free Allocations
Michal Feldman, John K. Lai |
SAGT | 2 |
| 2012 | Payment rules through discriminant-based classifiersabstractIn mechanism design it is typical to impose incentive compatibility and then derive an optimal mechanism subject to this constraint. By replacing the incentive compatibility requirement with the goal of minimizing expected ex post regret, we are able to adapt statistical machine learning techniques to the design of payment rules. This computational approach to mechanism design is applicable to domains with multi-dimensional types and situations where computational efficiency is a concern. Specifically, given an outcome rule and access to a type distribution, we train a support vector machine with a special discriminant function structure such that it implicitly establishes a payment rule with desirable incentive properties. We discuss applications to a multi-minded combinatorial auction with a greedy winner-determination algorithm and to an assignment problem with egalitarian outcome rule. Experimental results demonstrate both that the construction produces payment rules with low ex post regret, and that penalizing classification errors is effective in preventing failures of ex post individual rationality. Paul Dütting, Felix A. Fischer, Pichayut Jirapinyo, John K. Lai, Benjamin Lubin, David C. Parkes |
EC | 4 |
| 2012 | Monotone branch-and-bound search for restricted combinatorial auctionsabstractFaced with an intractable optimization problem, a common approach to computational mechanism design seeks a polynomial time approximation algorithm with an approximation guarantee. Rather than adopt this worst-case viewpoint, we introduce a new paradigm that seeks to obtain good performance on typical instances through a modification to the branch-and-bound search paradigm. Incentive compatibility in single-dimensional domains requires that an outcome improves monotonically for an agent as the agent's reported value increases. We obtain a monotone search algorithm by coupling an explicit sensitivity analysis on the decisions made during search with a correction to the outcome to ensure monotonicity. Extensive computational experiments on single-minded combinatorial auctions show better welfare performance than that available from existing approximation algorithms. John K. Lai, David C. Parkes |
EC | 1 |
| 2012 | Economics of BitTorrent communitiesabstractOver the years, private file-sharing communities built on the BitTorrent protocol have developed their own policies and mechanisms for motivating members to share content and contribute resources. By requiring members to maintain a minimum ratio between uploads and downloads, private communities effectively establish credit systems, and with them full-fledged economies. We report on a half-year-long measurement study of DIME -- a community for sharing live concert recordings -- that sheds light on the economic forces affecting users in such communities. A key observation is that while the download of files is priced only according to the size of the file, the rate of return for seeding new files is significantly greater than for seeding old files. We find via a natural experiment that users react to such differences in resale value by preferentially consuming older files during a 'free leech' period. We consider implications of these finding on a user's ability to earn credits and meet ratio enforcements, focusing in particular on the relationship between visitation frequency and wealth and on low bandwidth users. We then share details from an interview with DIME moderators, which highlights the goals of the community based on which we make suggestions for possible improvement. Ian A. Kash, John K. Lai, Aviv Zohar |
WWW | 2 |
| 2011 | Optimal Envy-Free Cake CuttingabstractWe consider the problem of fairly dividing a heterogeneous divisible good among agents with different preferences. Previous work has shown that envy-free allocations, i.e., where each agent prefers its own allocation to any other, may not be efficient, in the sense of maximizing the total value of the agents. Our goal is to pinpoint the most efficient allocations among all envy-free allocations. We provide tractable algorithms for doing so under different assumptions regarding the preferences of the agents. Yuga J. Cohler, John K. Lai, David C. Parkes, Ariel D. Procaccia |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2011 | Towards More Expressive Cake Cutting
Ioannis Caragiannis, John K. Lai, Ariel D. Procaccia |
IJCAI | 2 |
| 2010 | Truth, Justice, and Cake CuttingabstractCake cutting is a common metaphor for the division of a heterogeneous divisible good. There are numerous papers that study the problem of fairly dividing a cake; a small number of them also take into account self-interested agents and consequent strategic issues, but these papers focus on fairness and consider a strikingly weak notion of truthfulness. In this paper we investigate the problem of cutting a cake in a way that is truthful and fair, where for the first time our notion of dominant strategy truthfulness is the ubiquitous one in social choice and computer science. We design both deterministic and randomized cake cutting algorithms that are truthful and fair under different assumptions with respect to the valuation functions of the agents. Yiling Chen 0001, John K. Lai, David C. Parkes, Ariel D. Procaccia |
AAAI | 2 |