Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Gary Qiurui Ma
dblp:317/1141
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
4since 2021 · last 2024
0000-0003-2252-799XORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 since 2021Theory of computation · 2 · 2 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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
3 papers |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 91% Computational complexity · 9% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computational finance and economics · 100% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
matching |
1.5 | 2 | 2024 | Disrupting Bipartite Trading Networks: Matching for Revenue Maximization · EC 2024 Strategic Recommendation: Revenue Optimal Matching for Online Platforms (Student Abstract) · AAAI 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › market design
two-sided market |
1.5 | 2 | 2024 | Platform Equilibrium: Analyzing Social Welfare in Online Market Places · EC 2024 Strategic Recommendation: Revenue Optimal Matching for Online Platforms (Student Abstract) · AAAI 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › market equilibrium
competitive equilibrium |
1.0 | 2 | 2024 | Disrupting Bipartite Trading Networks: Matching for Revenue Maximization · EC 2024 Platform Equilibrium: Analyzing Social Welfare in Online Market Places · EC 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
market design |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Disrupting Bipartite Trading Networks: Matching for Revenue Maximization · EC 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
revenue maximization |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Disrupting Bipartite Trading Networks: Matching for Revenue Maximization · EC 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › matching
trading networks |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Disrupting Bipartite Trading Networks: Matching for Revenue Maximization · EC 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
transaction fee mechanism design |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Platform Equilibrium: Analyzing Social Welfare in Online Market Places · EC 2024 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
deep reinforcement learning |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Platform Behavior under Market Shocks: A Simulation Framework and Reinforcement-Learning Based Study · WWW 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
competitive equilibrium · 1.5multi-agent simulation · 1.3deep reinforcement learning · 1.3polynomial-time algorithm · 0.8nash equilibrium analysis · 0.8competitive equilibrium analysis · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Strategic Recommendation: Revenue Optimal Matching for Online Platforms (Student Abstract)abstractWe consider a platform in a two-sided market with unit-supply sellers and unit-demand buyers. Each buyer can transact with a subset of sellers it knows off platform and another seller that the platform recommends. Given the choice of sellers, transactions and prices form a competitive equilibrium. The platform selects one seller for each buyer, and charges a fixed percentage of prices to all transactions that it recommends. The platform seeks to maximize total revenue. We show that the platform's problem is NP-hard, even when each buyer knows at most two buyers off platform. Finally, when each buyer values all sellers equally and knows only one buyer off platform, we provide a polynomial time algorithm that optimally solves the problem. Luca D'Amico-Wong, Gary Qiurui Ma, David C. Parkes |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2024 | Disrupting Bipartite Trading Networks: Matching for Revenue MaximizationabstractWe model the role of an online platform disrupting a market with unit-demand buyers and unit-supply sellers. Each seller can transact with a subset of the buyers whom she already knows, as well as with any additional buyers to whom she is introduced by the platform. Given these constraints on trade, prices and transactions are induced by a competitive equilibrium. The platform's revenue is proportional to the total price of all trades between platform-introduced buyers and sellers. Luca D'Amico-Wong, Yannai A. Gonczarowski, Gary Qiurui Ma, David C. Parkes |
EC | 3 |
| 2024 | Platform Equilibrium: Analyzing Social Welfare in Online Market PlacesabstractWe introduce the theoretical study of a Platform Equilibrium in a market with unit-demand buyers and unit-supply sellers. Each seller can join a platform and transact with any buyer or remain off-platform and transact with a subset of buyers whom she knows. Given the constraints on trade, prices form a competitive equilibrium and clears the market. The platform charges a transaction fee to all on-platform sellers, in the form of a fraction of on-platform sellers' price. The platform chooses the fraction to maximize revenue. A Platform Equilibrium is a Nash equilibrium of the game where each seller decides whether or not to join the platform, balancing the effect of a larger pool of buyers to trade with, against the imposition of a transaction fee. Alon Eden, Gary Qiurui Ma, David C. Parkes |
EC | 2 |
| 2023 | Platform Behavior under Market Shocks: A Simulation Framework and Reinforcement-Learning Based StudyabstractWe study the behavior of an economic platform (e.g., Amazon, Uber Eats, Instacart) under shocks, such as COVID-19 lockdowns, and the effect of different regulation considerations. To this end, we develop a multi-agent simulation environment of a platform economy in a multi-period setting where shocks may occur and disrupt the economy. Buyers and sellers are heterogeneous and modeled as economically-motivated agents, choosing whether or not to pay fees to access the platform. We use deep reinforcement learning to model the fee-setting and matching behavior of the platform, and consider two major types of regulation frameworks: (1) taxation policies and (2) platform fee restrictions. We offer a number of simulated experiments that cover different market settings and shed light on regulatory tradeoffs. Our results show that while many interventions are ineffective with a sophisticated platform actor, we identify a particular kind of regulation—fixing fees to the optimal, no-shock fees while still allowing a platform to choose how to match buyers and sellers—as holding promise for promoting the efficiency and resilience of the economic system. Xintong Wang 0002, Gary Qiurui Ma, Alon Eden, Clara Li, Alexander Trott, Stephan Zheng, David C. Parkes |
WWW | 2 |