Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Pengyu Qian
dblp:221/0629
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0002-1759-1009ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory of computation · 4 · 2 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 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
4 papers |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 75% Mathematical optimization · 11% Graph algorithms and graph theory · 8% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers |
Performance modeling and evaluation · 54% Distributed systems · 46% |
Topics — the 13 heaviest of 14, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
resource allocation |
0.9 | 2 | 2020 | Blind Dynamic Resource Allocation in Closed Networks via Mirror Backpressure · EC 2020 Queue Lengths as Constantly Adapting Prices: Allocative Efficiency Under Random Dynamics · EC 2020 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
incentive compatibility |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Incentivizing Resource Pooling · EC 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
mechanism design |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Incentivizing Resource Pooling · EC 2024 |
Mathematical optimization
queueing systems |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Incentivizing Resource Pooling · EC 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › resource allocation
resource pooling |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Incentivizing Resource Pooling · EC 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › market design
matching markets |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | In which matching markets does the short side enjoy an advantage? · SODA 2021 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory
random graphs |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | In which matching markets does the short side enjoy an advantage? · SODA 2021 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › matching
stable matching |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | In which matching markets does the short side enjoy an advantage? · SODA 2021 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
dynamic mechanism design |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Queue Lengths as Constantly Adapting Prices: Allocative Efficiency Under Random Dynamics · EC 2020 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › resource allocation
dynamic resource allocation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Blind Dynamic Resource Allocation in Closed Networks via Mirror Backpressure · EC 2020 |
Approximation and online algorithms › online algorithms
stochastic arrival |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Queue Lengths as Constantly Adapting Prices: Allocative Efficiency Under Random Dynamics · EC 2020 |
Performance modeling and evaluation › queueing models
closed queueing networks |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Blind Dynamic Resource Allocation in Closed Networks via Mirror Backpressure · EC 2020 |
Performance modeling and evaluation
queueing analysis |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Blind Dynamic Resource Allocation in Closed Networks via Mirror Backpressure · EC 2020 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
queueing theory · 1.5mechanism design · 1.5mirror descent · 0.9backpressure · 0.9probabilistic analysis · 0.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Incentivizing Resource PoolingabstractResource pooling improves system efficiency drastically in large stochastic systems, but its effective implementation in decentralized systems remains relatively underexplored. In this paper, we study the problem of incentivizing resourcing pooling when agents are self-interested, and their states are private information. Specifically, we study a standard multi-server queueing model in which each server is associated with an M/M/1 queue and aims to minimize its time-average job holding and processing costs. Our primary motivation is applications in the design of decentralized computing markets (potentially implemented on blockchains), among others. Chen Chen 0038, Pengyu Qian |
EC | 3 |
| 2021 | In which matching markets does the short side enjoy an advantage?abstractWe revisit the popular random matching market model introduced by Knuth (1976) and Pittel (1989), and shown by Ashlagi, Kanoria and Leshno (2013) to exhibit a “stark effect of competition”; in particular, with any difference in the number of agents on the two sides (“imbalance”), the short side agents obtain substantially better outcomes. We generalize the model to allow “partially connected” markets with each agent having an average degree d in a random (undirected) graph. Each agent has a (uniformly random) preference ranking over only their neighbors in the graph. We characterize stable matchings in large markets and find that the short side enjoys a significant advantage only for d exceeding log2 n where n is the number of agents on one side: For moderately connected markets with d = o(log2 n), we find that there is no advantage to being on the short side (for O(n1–∊) market imbalance), with agents on both sides getting a -ranked partner on average. Notably, this “mild competition” regime extends far beyond the connectivity threshold of d = Θ(log n). In contrast, for densely connected markets with d = ω(log2 n), we find a strong effect of competition, namely, short side agents get a log n-ranked partner on average, while the long side agents get a partner of (much larger) rank d/log n on average. Our results and analysis suggest that in general matching markets, being on the short side confers an advantage if and only if the number of short-side agents who remain unmatched is small relative to the market imbalance. Yashodhan Kanoria, Seungki Min, Pengyu Qian |
SODA | 3 |
| 2020 | Queue Lengths as Constantly Adapting Prices: Allocative Efficiency Under Random DynamicsabstractWaiting lists are common mechanisms for allocating scarce items without monetary transfers. Examples include the allocation of cadaver organs to patients in need of a transplant, public housing apartments to applicants, health care services to patients, and even spots at childcare centers to parents. In all these markets waiting times play the role of prices in guiding the allocation and rationing items. But while prices are set by the designer, waiting times are endogenously determined by the number of agents waiting. Moreover, waiting times are not fixed, and continuously adjust as items arrive or agents join. When agents and items arrive stochastically over time, waiting times stochastically adjust over time. Itai Ashlagi, Jacob D. Leshno, Pengyu Qian, Amin Saberi |
EC | 3 |
| 2020 | Blind Dynamic Resource Allocation in Closed Networks via Mirror BackpressureabstractWe study the problem of maximizing payoff generated over a period of time in a general class of closed queueing networks with finite, fixed number of supply units which circulate in the system. Demand arrives stochastically, and serving a demand unit (customer) causes a supply unit to relocate from the "origin" to the "destination" of the customer. We consider general controls including entry control, pricing, and assignment. Motivating applications include shared transportation platforms and scrip systems. Yashodhan Kanoria, Pengyu Qian |
EC | 2 |