EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Thomas Kleine Buening
dblp:286/5270 · also Thomas Kleine Büning
· DBLP profile ↗
8ranked-venue papers
7as first author
8since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 8 · 7 first-author · 8 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.
| Artificial intelligence
5 papers |
Reinforcement learning · 68% Multi-agent systems · 13% Trustworthy machine learning · 10% | |
| Theoretical computer science
3 papers |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 88% Mathematical optimization · 12% |
Topics — the 18 heaviest of 18, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
mechanism design |
2.4 | 3 | 2025 | Strategyproof Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback · NeurIPS 2025 Strategic Linear Contextual Bandits · NeurIPS 2024 Bandits Meet Mechanism Design to Combat Clickbait in Online Recommendation · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › imitation learning
inverse reinforcement learning |
1.3 | 2 | 2024 | Environment Design for Inverse Reinforcement Learning · ICML 2024 Interactive Inverse Reinforcement Learning for Cooperative Games · ICML 2022 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Strategyproof Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback · NeurIPS 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › alignment
pluralistic alignment |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Strategyproof Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
reinforcement learning from human feedback |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Strategyproof Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback · NeurIPS 2025 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
incentive alignment |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Strategyproof Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback · NeurIPS 2025 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › incentive compatibility
strategyproofness |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Strategyproof Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback · NeurIPS 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › bandit
contextual bandit |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Strategic Linear Contextual Bandits · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › reinforcement learning environment
environment design |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Environment Design for Inverse Reinforcement Learning · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
multi-armed bandit |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Bandits Meet Mechanism Design to Combat Clickbait in Online Recommendation · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
regret minimization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Strategic Linear Contextual Bandits · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › reward learning
reward learning from demonstrations |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Environment Design for Inverse Reinforcement Learning · ICML 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › multi-agent systems › multi-agent learning
incentive-aware learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Bandits Meet Mechanism Design to Combat Clickbait in Online Recommendation · ICLR 2024 |
Mathematical optimization › online optimization
linear contextual bandits |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Strategic Linear Contextual Bandits · NeurIPS 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
strategic agents |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Strategic Linear Contextual Bandits · NeurIPS 2024 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems › game theory
cooperative game |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Interactive Inverse Reinforcement Learning for Cooperative Games · ICML 2022 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems › game theory
stackelberg game |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Interactive Inverse Reinforcement Learning for Cooperative Games · ICML 2022 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
reward learning |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Interactive Inverse Reinforcement Learning for Cooperative Games · ICML 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
mechanism design · 3.3pessimistic median of MLEs · 1.7optimistic grim trigger mechanism · 1.5nash equilibrium analysis · 1.5UCB · 1.5adaptive environment selection · 0.8stackelberg formulation · 0.6markov decision process · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | A Minimax Approach to Ad Hoc Teamwork
Victor Villin, Thomas Kleine Buening, Christos Dimitrakakis |
AAMAS | 2 |
| 2025 | Strategyproof Reinforcement Learning from Human FeedbackabstractWe study Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) in settings where multiple labelers may strategically misreport feedback to steer the learned policy toward their own preferences. We show that existing RLHF algorithms, including recent pluralistic methods, are not strategyproof, and that even a single strategic labeler can cause arbitrarily large misalignment with social welfare. Moreover, we prove that, in the worst case, any strategyproof RLHF algorithm must perform $k$-times worse than the optimal policy, where $k$ is the number of labelers. This suggests a fundamental trade-off between incentive alignment (ensuring labelers report truthfully) and policy alignment (maximizing social welfare). To address this, we propose the Pessimistic Median of MLEs algorithm, which, under appropriate policy coverage assumptions, is approximately strategyproof and converges to the optimal policy as the number of labelers and samples increases. Our results apply to both contextual bandits and Markov decision processes. Thomas Kleine Buening, Jiarui Gan, Debmalya Mandal, Marta Z. Kwiatkowska |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2024 | Bandits Meet Mechanism Design to Combat Clickbait in Online RecommendationabstractWe study a strategic variant of the multi-armed bandit problem, which we coin the strategic click-bandit. This model is motivated by applications in online recommendation where the choice of recommended items depends on both the click-through rates and the post-click rewards. Like in classical bandits, rewards follow a fixed unknown distribution. However, we assume that the click-rate of each arm is chosen strategically by the arm (e.g., a host on Airbnb) in order to maximize the number of times it gets clicked. The algorithm designer does not know the post-click rewards nor the arms' actions (i.e., strategically chosen click-rates) in advance, and must learn both values over time. To solve this problem, we design an incentive-aware learning algorithm, UCB-S, which achieves two goals simultaneously: (a) incentivizing desirable arm behavior under uncertainty; (b) minimizing regret by learning unknown parameters. We approximately characterize all Nash equilibria of the arms under UCB-S and show a $\tilde{\mathcal{O}} (\sqrt{KT})$ regret bound uniformly in every equilibrium. We also show that incentive-unaware algorithms generally fail to achieve low regret in the strategic click-bandit. Finally, we support our theoretical results by simulations of strategic arm behavior which confirm the effectiveness and robustness of our proposed incentive design. Thomas Kleine Buening, Aadirupa Saha, Christos Dimitrakakis |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2024 | Environment Design for Inverse Reinforcement LearningabstractLearning a reward function from demonstrations suffers from low sample-efficiency. Even with abundant data, current inverse reinforcement learning methods that focus on learning from a single environment can fail to handle slight changes in the environment dynamics. We tackle these challenges through adaptive environment design. In our framework, the learner repeatedly interacts with the expert, with the former selecting environments to identify the reward function as quickly as possible from the expert’s demonstrations in said environments. This results in improvements in both sample-efficiency and robustness, as we show experimentally, for both exact and approximate inference. Thomas Kleine Buening, Victor Villin, Christos Dimitrakakis |
ICML | 1 |
| 2024 | Strategic Linear Contextual BanditsabstractMotivated by the phenomenon of strategic agents gaming a recommender system to maximize the number of times they are recommended to users, we study a strategic variant of the linear contextual bandit problem, where the arms can strategically misreport privately observed contexts to the learner. We treat the algorithm design problem as one of *mechanism design* under uncertainty and propose the Optimistic Grim Trigger Mechanism (OptGTM) that incentivizes the agents (i.e., arms) to report their contexts truthfully while simultaneously minimizing regret. We also show that failing to account for the strategic nature of the agents results in linear regret. However, a trade-off between mechanism design and regret minimization appears to be unavoidable. More broadly, this work aims to provide insight into the intersection of online learning and mechanism design. Thomas Kleine Buening, Aadirupa Saha, Christos Dimitrakakis |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2023 | Minimax-Bayes Reinforcement LearningabstractWhile the Bayesian decision-theoretic framework offers an elegant solution to the problem of decision making under uncertainty, one question is how to appropriately select the prior distribution. One idea is to employ a worst-case prior. However, this is not as easy to specify in sequential decision making as in simple statistical estimation problems. This paper studies (sometimes approximate) minimax-Bayes solutions for various reinforcement learning problems to gain insights into the properties of the corresponding priors and policies. We find that while the worst-case prior depends on the setting, the corresponding minimax policies are more robust than those that assume a standard (i.e. uniform) prior. Thomas Kleine Buening, Christos Dimitrakakis, Hannes Eriksson, Divya Grover, Emilio Jorge |
AISTATS | 1 |
| 2023 | ANACONDA: An Improved Dynamic Regret Algorithm for Adaptive Non-Stationary Dueling BanditsabstractWe study the problem of non-stationary dueling bandits and provide the first adaptive dynamic regret algorithm for this problem. The only two existing attempts in this line of work fall short across multiple dimensions, including pessimistic measures of non-stationary complexity and non-adaptive parameter tuning that requires knowledge of the number of preference changes. We develop an elimination-based rescheduling algorithm to overcome these shortcomings and show a near-optimal $\tilde O(\sqrt{S^{CW} T})$ dynamic regret bound, where $\S^{CW}$ is the number of times the Condorcet winner changes in $T$ rounds. This yields the first near-optimal dynamic regret bound for unknown $S^{CW}$. We further study other related notions of non-stationarity for which we also prove near-optimal dynamic regret guarantees under additional assumptions on the preference model. Thomas Kleine Buening, Aadirupa Saha |
AISTATS | 1 |
| 2022 | Interactive Inverse Reinforcement Learning for Cooperative GamesabstractWe study the problem of designing autonomous agents that can learn to cooperate effectively with a potentially suboptimal partner while having no access to the joint reward function. This problem is modeled as a cooperative episodic two-agent Markov decision process. We assume control over only the first of the two agents in a Stackelberg formulation of the game, where the second agent is acting so as to maximise expected utility given the first agent’s policy. How should the first agent act in order to learn the joint reward function as quickly as possible and so that the joint policy is as close to optimal as possible? We analyse how knowledge about the reward function can be gained in this interactive two-agent scenario. We show that when the learning agent’s policies have a significant effect on the transition function, the reward function can be learned efficiently. Thomas Kleine Buening, Anne-Marie George, Christos Dimitrakakis |
ICML | 1 |