EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Grzegorz Lisowski
dblp:225/1909
· DBLP profile ↗
15ranked-venue papers
4as first author
13since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0007-1604-8999ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 13 · 4 first-author · 11 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 8 · 2 first-author · 6 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2 · 2 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
9 papers |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 80% Computational complexity · 13% Graph algorithms and graph theory · 4% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
2 papers |
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100% |
Topics — the 19 heaviest of 21, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
computational social choice |
4.1 | 6 | 2026 | Computing Equilibrium Nominations in Presidential Elections · AAAI 2026 Identifying Imperfect Clones in Elections · AAAI 2026 The Cost Perspective of Liquid Democracy: Feasibility and Control · AAAI 2025 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice › election control
strategic nomination |
1.6 | 2 | 2026 | Computing Equilibrium Nominations in Presidential Elections · AAAI 2026 Equilibria in Strategic Nominee Selection · IJCAI 2022 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › restricted preference domains
single-peaked preferences |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Computing Equilibrium Nominations in Presidential Elections · AAAI 2026 |
Computational complexity
parameterized complexity |
1.0 | 2 | 2026 | Identifying and Eliminating Majority Illusion in Social Networks · AAAI 2023 Identifying Imperfect Clones in Elections · AAAI 2026 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice › multiwinner voting
approval-based committee voting |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Strategic Cost Selection in Participatory Budgeting · NeurIPS 2025 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice
liquid democracy |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | The Cost Perspective of Liquid Democracy: Feasibility and Control · AAAI 2025 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › solution concepts in games › equilibrium concepts
nash equilibrium existence |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Strategic Cost Selection in Participatory Budgeting · NeurIPS 2025 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
participatory budgeting |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Strategic Cost Selection in Participatory Budgeting · NeurIPS 2025 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory › network analysis
social network analysis |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Identifying and Eliminating Majority Illusion in Social Networks · AAAI 2023 |
Computational complexity
game complexity |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Equilibria in Strategic Nominee Selection · IJCAI 2022 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice › voting manipulation
coalitional manipulation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Coalitional Strategic Behaviour in Collective Decision Making · AAAI 2020 |
Computational complexity › complexity classes › PSPACE
PSPACE-completeness |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Convergence of Opinion Diffusion is PSPACE-Complete · AAAI 2020 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
strategic manipulation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Coalitional Strategic Behaviour in Collective Decision Making · AAAI 2020 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice
voting rules |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Coalitional Strategic Behaviour in Collective Decision Making · AAAI 2020 |
Algorithms and data structures
polynomial-time algorithms |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Computing Equilibrium Nominations in Presidential Elections · AAAI 2026 |
Mathematical optimization › constrained optimization
budget-constrained optimization |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | The Cost Perspective of Liquid Democracy: Feasibility and Control · AAAI 2025 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems
opinion dynamics |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Equilibria in Strategic Nominee Selection · IJCAI 2022 |
Computational social science and digital humanities › social influence
social network influence |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Coalitional Strategic Behaviour in Collective Decision Making · AAAI 2020 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social networks › social network influence
opinion dynamics |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | Convergence of Opinion Diffusion is PSPACE-Complete · AAAI 2020 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
game theory · 3.0preference recognition algorithm · 1.0parameterized complexity analysis · 1.0experimental study · 0.9complexity analysis · 0.9approximation algorithm · 0.9algorithmic analysis · 0.9parameterized complexity · 0.7NP-hardness · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Identifying Imperfect Clones in ElectionsabstractA perfect clone in an ordinal election (i.e., an election where the voters rank the candidates in a strict linear order) is a set of candidates that each voter ranks consecutively. We consider different relaxations of this notion: *independent* or *subelection clones* are sets of candidates that only some of the voters recognize as a perfect clone, whereas *approximate clones* are sets of candidates such that every voter ranks their members close to each other, but not necessarily consecutively. We establish the complexity of identifying such imperfect clones, and of partitioning the candidates into families of imperfect clones. We also study the parameterized complexity of these problems with respect to a set of natural parameters such as the number of voters, the size or the number of imperfect clones we are searching for, or their level of imperfection. Piotr Faliszewski, Lukasz Janeczko, Grzegorz Lisowski, Kristýna Pekárková, Ildikó Schlotter |
AAAI | 3 |
| 2026 | Computing Equilibrium Nominations in Presidential ElectionsabstractWe study strategic candidate nomination by parties in elections decided by Plurality voting. Each party selects a nominee before the election, and the winner is chosen from the nominated candidates based on the voters' preferences. We introduce a new restriction on these preferences, which we call party-aligned single-peakedness: all voters agree on a common ordering of the parties along an ideological axis, but may differ in their perceptions of the positions of individual candidates within each party. The preferences of each voter are single-peaked with respect to their own axis over the candidates, which is consistent with the global ordering of the parties. We present a polynomial-time algorithm for recognizing whether a preference profile satisfies party-aligned single-peakedness. In this domain, we give polynomial-time algorithms for deciding whether a given party can become the winner under some (or all) nominations, and whether this can occur in some pure Nash equilibrium. We also prove a tight result about the guaranteed existence of pure strategy Nash equilibria for elections with up to three parties for single-peaked and party-aligned single-peaked preference profiles. Piotr Faliszewski, Stanislaw Kazmierowski, Grzegorz Lisowski, Ildikó Schlotter, Paolo Turrini |
AAAI | 3 |
| 2025 | The Cost Perspective of Liquid Democracy: Feasibility and ControlabstractWe 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 |
AAAI | 3 |
| 2025 | Stability in Newcomers' Housing: A Story About Anonymous Preferences and Beyond
Grzegorz Lisowski, Simon Schierreich |
EUMAS (1) | 1 |
| 2025 | Neighborhood Stability in Assignments on Graphs
Haris Aziz 0001, Grzegorz Lisowski, Mashbat Suzuki, Jeremy Vollen |
AAMAS | 2 |
| 2025 | Strategic Cost Selection in Participatory BudgetingabstractWe study strategic behavior of project proposers in the context of approval-based
participatory budgeting (PB). In our model we assume that the votes are fixed and
known and the proposers want to set as high project prices as possible, provided
that their projects get selected and the prices are not below the minimum costs of
their delivery. We study the existence of pure Nash equilibria (NE) in such games,
focusing on the AV/Cost, Phragmen, and Method of Equal Shares rules. We also
provide an experimental study of cost selection on real-life PB election data. Piotr Faliszewski, Lukasz Janeczko, Andrzej Kaczmarczyk 0001, Grzegorz Lisowski, Piotr Skowron 0001, Stanislaw Szufa, Mateusz Szwagierczak |
NeurIPS | 4 |
| 2025 | Neighborhood Stability in Assignments on Graphs
Haris Aziz 0001, Grzegorz Lisowski, Mashbat Suzuki, Jeremy Vollen |
WINE | 2 |
| 2025 | A Complexity-Theoretic Analysis of Majority Illusion in Social NetworksabstractMajority illusion occurs in a social network when the majority of the network vertices belong to a certain type but the majority of each vertex's neighbours belong to a different type, therefore creating the wrong perception, i.e., the illusion, that the majority type is different from the actual one. From a system engineering point of view, this motivates the search for algorithms to detect and, where possible, correct this often undesirable phenomenon. In this we provide a computational study of majority illusion in social networks, paying particular attention to the problem of its verification, i.e., whether majority illusion can occur on social networks, and elimination, i.e., how can we eliminate majority illusion by social network rewiring. While we show that the problems we consider are generally NP-complete, we also provide a parameterised complexity analysis, showing FPT-algorithms for the detection problem and W[1]-hardness for the elimination problem, using natural graph-theoretic parameters. Umberto Grandi, Lawqueen Kanesh, Grzegorz Lisowski, M. S. Ramanujan 0001, Paolo Turrini |
J. Artif. Intell. Res. | 3 |
| 2024 | Guide to Numerical Experiments on Elections in Computational Social Choice
Niclas Boehmer, Piotr Faliszewski, Lukasz Janeczko, Andrzej Kaczmarczyk 0001, Grzegorz Lisowski, Grzegorz Pierczynski, Simon Rey, Dariusz Stolicki, Stanislaw Szufa, Tomasz Was |
IJCAI | 5 |
| 2024 | The Team Order Problem: Maximizing the Probability of Matching Being Large Enough
Haris Aziz 0001, Jiarui Gan, Grzegorz Lisowski, Ali Pourmiri |
SAGT | 3 |
| 2023 | Identifying and Eliminating Majority Illusion in Social NetworksabstractMajority illusion occurs in a social network when the majority of the network vertices belong to a certain type but the majority of each vertex's neighbours belong to a different type, therefore creating the wrong perception, i.e., the illusion, that the majority type is different from the actual one. From a system engineering point of view, this motivates the search for algorithms to detect and, where possible, correct this undesirable phenomenon. In this paper we initiate the computational study of majority illusion in social networks, providing NP-hardness and parametrised complexity results for its occurrence and elimination. Umberto Grandi, Lawqueen Kanesh, Grzegorz Lisowski, M. S. Ramanujan 0001, Paolo Turrini |
AAAI | 3 |
| 2022 | Strategic Nominee Selection in Tournament Solutions
Grzegorz Lisowski |
EUMAS | 1 |
| 2022 | Equilibria in Strategic Nominee SelectionabstractIn my PhD project I explore the game-theoretic problems related to the strategic selection of party nominees. I aim at establishing the complexity of computational problems in this setting. I further study aspects of opinion diffusion protocols related to this problem. Grzegorz Lisowski |
IJCAI | 1 |
| 2020 | Convergence of Opinion Diffusion is PSPACE-CompleteabstractWe analyse opinion diffusion in social networks, where a finite set of individuals is connected in a directed graph and each simultaneously changes their opinion to that of the majority of their influencers. We study the algorithmic properties of the fixed-point behaviour of such networks, showing that the problem of establishing whether individuals converge to stable opinions is PSPACE-complete. Dmitry Chistikov 0001, Grzegorz Lisowski, Mike Paterson, Paolo Turrini |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2020 | Coalitional Strategic Behaviour in Collective Decision MakingabstractIn my PhD project I study the algorithmic aspects of strategic behaviour in collective decision making, with the special focus on voting mechanisms. I investigate two manners of manipulation: (1) strategic selection of candidates from groups of potential representatives and (2) influence on voters located in a social network. Grzegorz Lisowski |
AAAI | 1 |