Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Jonas Gehrlein

dblp:365/4480 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
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

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Blockchain and cryptocurrency security
blockchain governance
0.812024
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
0.812024
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
0.812024
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
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Approval-Based Committee Voting in Practice: A Case Study of (over-)Representation in the Polkadot Blockchain
abstract
We 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
AAAI4