Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jonas Gehrlein
dblp:365/4480
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 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
1 paper |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 100% | |
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
blockchain governance |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Approval-Based Committee Voting in Practice: A Case Study of (over-)Representation in the Polkadot Blockchain · AAAI 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice › multiwinner voting
approval-based committee voting |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Approval-Based Committee Voting in Practice: A Case Study of (over-)Representation in the Polkadot Blockchain · AAAI 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
social choice |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Approval-Based Committee Voting in Practice: A Case Study of (over-)Representation in the Polkadot Blockchain · AAAI 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
proportionality measures · 1.5data collection · 1.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Approval-Based Committee Voting in Practice: A Case Study of (over-)Representation in the Polkadot BlockchainabstractWe provide the first large-scale data collection of real-world approval-based committee elections. These elections have been conducted on the Polkadot blockchain as part of their Nominated Proof-of-Stake mechanism and contain around one thousand candidates and tens of thousands of (weighted) voters each. We conduct an in-depth study of application-relevant questions, including a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the outcomes returned by different voting rules. Besides considering proportionality measures that are standard in the multiwinner voting literature, we pay particular attention to less-studied measures of overrepresentation, as these are closely related to the security of the Polkadot network. We also analyze how different design decisions such as the committee size affect the examined measures. Niclas Boehmer, Markus Brill, Alfonso Cevallos, Jonas Gehrlein, Luis Sánchez-Fernández 0001, Ulrike Schmidt-Kraepelin |
AAAI | 4 |