Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Anna Lunghi
dblp:378/2867
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
1as first author
5since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0006-2772-6508ORCID · corroborated
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 · 1 first-author · 2 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
4 papers |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 52% Mathematical optimization · 22% Approximation and online algorithms · 12% | |
| Artificial intelligence
3 papers |
Reinforcement learning · 59% Learning theory · 41% |
Topics — the 16 heaviest of 16, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
constrained reinforcement learning |
1.9 | 2 | 2026 | Policy optimization for CMDPs with bandit feedback: Best-of-both-worlds and beyond · Artif. Intell. 2026 Policy Optimization for CMDPs with Bandit Feedback: Learning Stochastic and Adversarial Constraints · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
policy optimization |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Policy optimization for CMDPs with bandit feedback: Best-of-both-worlds and beyond · Artif. Intell. 2026 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
sample complexity |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | The Sample Complexity of Uniform Approximation for Multi-dimensional CDFs and Fixed-Price Mechanisms · STOC 2026 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
statistical learning theory |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | The Sample Complexity of Uniform Approximation for Multi-dimensional CDFs and Fixed-Price Mechanisms · STOC 2026 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
bilateral trade |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Better Regret Rates in Bilateral Trade via Sublinear Budget Violation · SODA 2026 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
budget balance |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Better Regret Rates in Bilateral Trade via Sublinear Budget Violation · SODA 2026 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › bilateral trade
fixed-price mechanisms |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | The Sample Complexity of Uniform Approximation for Multi-dimensional CDFs and Fixed-Price Mechanisms · STOC 2026 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
mechanism design |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | The Sample Complexity of Uniform Approximation for Multi-dimensional CDFs and Fixed-Price Mechanisms · STOC 2026 |
Mathematical optimization
online optimization |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Policy optimization for CMDPs with bandit feedback: Best-of-both-worlds and beyond · Artif. Intell. 2026 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
regret minimization |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Better Regret Rates in Bilateral Trade via Sublinear Budget Violation · SODA 2026 |
Computational complexity › learning theory
sample complexity |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | The Sample Complexity of Uniform Approximation for Multi-dimensional CDFs and Fixed-Price Mechanisms · STOC 2026 |
Approximation and online algorithms
online learning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Policy Optimization for CMDPs with Bandit Feedback: Learning Stochastic and Adversarial Constraints · ICML 2025 |
Mathematical optimization › sequential decision making
policy optimization |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Policy Optimization for CMDPs with Bandit Feedback: Learning Stochastic and Adversarial Constraints · ICML 2025 |
Approximation and online algorithms › online learning
bandit feedback |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Policy optimization for CMDPs with bandit feedback: Best-of-both-worlds and beyond · Artif. Intell. 2026 |
Information theory › probability theory › probability distributions
cumulative distribution function |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | The Sample Complexity of Uniform Approximation for Multi-dimensional CDFs and Fixed-Price Mechanisms · STOC 2026 |
Mathematical optimization
optimization |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | The Sample Complexity of Uniform Approximation for Multi-dimensional CDFs and Fixed-Price Mechanisms · STOC 2026 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
bandit feedback · 5.7best-of-both-worlds analysis · 2.0DKW inequality · 2.0regret analysis · 1.7policy optimization · 1.7no-regret learning · 1.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Better Regret Rates in Bilateral Trade via Sublinear Budget ViolationabstractBilateral trade is a central problem in algorithmic economics, and recent work has explored how to design trading mechanisms that use no-regret learning algorithms. However, no-regret learning is impossible when budget balance has to be enforced at each time step. Bernasconi et al. show how this impossibility result can be circumvented by relaxing the budget balance constraint to hold only globally over all time steps. In particular, they design an algorithm achieving regret of the order of \(\tilde{O}(T^{^3/_4})\) and provide a lower bound of \(\Omega(T^{^5/_7})\). Anna Lunghi, Matteo Castiglioni, Alberto Marchesi 0001 |
SODA | 1 |
| 2026 | The Sample Complexity of Uniform Approximation for Multi-dimensional CDFs and Fixed-Price MechanismsabstractWe study the sample complexity of learning a uniform approximation of an n-dimensional cumulative distribution function (CDF) within an error є > 0, when observations are restricted to a minimal one-bit feedback. This serves as a counterpart to the multivariate DKW inequality under “full feedback”, extending it to the setting of “bandit feedback”. Our main result shows a near-dimensional-invariance in the sample complexity: we get a uniform є-approximation with a sample complexity 1/є3log(1/є)O(n) over a arbitrary fine grid, where the dimensionality n only affects logarithmic terms. As direct corollaries, we provide tight sample complexity bounds and novel regret guarantees for learning fixed-price mechanisms in small markets, such as bilateral trade settings. Matteo Castiglioni, Anna Lunghi, Alberto Marchesi 0001 |
STOC | 2 |
| 2026 | Policy optimization for CMDPs with bandit feedback: Best-of-both-worlds and beyond
Francesco Emanuele Stradi, Anna Lunghi, Matteo Castiglioni, Alberto Marchesi 0001, Nicola Gatti 0001 |
Artif. Intell. | 2 |
| 2025 | Policy Optimization for CMDPs with Bandit Feedback: Learning Stochastic and Adversarial ConstraintsabstractWe study online learning in constrained Markov decision processes (CMDPs) in which rewards and constraints may be either stochastic or adversarial. In such settings, stradi et al. (2024) proposed the first best-of-both-worlds algorithm able to seamlessly handle stochastic and adversarial constraints, achieving optimal regret and constraint violation bounds in both cases. This algorithm suffers from two major drawbacks. First, it only works under full feedback, which severely limits its applicability in practice. Moreover, it relies on optimizing over the space of occupancy measures, which requires solving convex optimization problems, an highly inefficient task. In this paper, we provide the first best-of-both-worlds algorithm for CMDPs with bandit feedback. Specifically, when the constraints are stochastic, the algorithm achieves $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(\sqrt{T})$ regret and constraint violation, while, when they are adversarial, it attains $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(\sqrt{T})$ constraint violation and a tight fraction of the optimal reward. Moreover, our algorithm is based on a policy optimization approach, which is much more efficient than occupancy-measure-based methods. Francesco Emanuele Stradi, Anna Lunghi, Matteo Castiglioni, Alberto Marchesi 0001, Nicola Gatti 0001 |
ICML | 2 |
| 2025 | Taming Adversarial Constraints in CMDPsabstractIn constrained MDPs (CMDPs) with adversarial rewards and constraints, a known impossibility result prevents any algorithm from attaining sublinear regret and constraint violation, when competing against a best-in-hindsight policy that satisfies the constraints on average. In this paper, we show how to ease such a negative result, by considering settings that generalize both stochastic CMDPs and adversarial ones. We provide algorithms whose performances smoothly degrade as the level of environment adverseness increases. In this paper, we show that this negative result can be eased in CMDPs with non-stationary rewards and constraints, by providing algorithms whose performances smoothly degrade as non-stationarity increases. Specifically, they attain $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}} (\sqrt{T} + C)$ regret and positive constraint violation under bandit feedback, where $C$ measures the adverseness of rewards and constraints. This is $C = \Theta(T)$ in the worst case, coherently with the impossibility result for adversarial CMDPs. First, we design an algorithm with the desired guarantees when $C$ is known. Then, in the case $C$ is unknown, we obtain the same results by embedding multiple instances of such an algorithm in a general meta-procedure, which suitably selects them so as to balance the trade-off between regret and constraint violation. Francesco Emanuele Stradi, Anna Lunghi, Matteo Castiglioni, Alberto Marchesi 0001, Nicola Gatti 0001 |
NeurIPS | 2 |