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

Martin Tingley

dblp:410/3078 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0003-6204-0235ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 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 · 50% Mathematical optimization · 50%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Mathematical optimization
optimization
0.912025
Optimizing Returns from Experimentation Programs · EC 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

empirical bayes · 0.9dynamic programming · 0.9bayesian analysis · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Optimizing Returns from Experimentation Programs
abstract
Experimentation in online digital platforms is often used to inform decision making. Specifically, the goal of many experiments is to optimize a metric of interest. Null hypothesis statistical testing can be ill-suited to this task, as it is indifferent to the magnitude of effect sizes and opportunity costs. Moreover, in practice, related experiments can often be grouped into portfolios called experimentation programs where the goal is to optimize a single metric. Past tests in an experimentation program inform useful priors on treatment effects. In these settings, we discuss how experimentation practice should change when the goal is optimization. We survey the literature on Bayesian and empirical Bayes analyses of A/B test portfolios, and single out the A/B Testing Problem [Azevedo et al., 2020] as a starting point, which treats experimentation as a constrained optimization problem. We emphasize that the framework can be implemented by appropriately tuning p-value thresholds, a result which seems under-utilized by practitioners. Furthermore, we develop several extensions of the A/B testing problem to managing multiple experimentation programs, managing a single program over time, and allowing units to be enrolled in multiple tests. Each of these can be solved by dynamic programming, and together they extend the utility of the framework in practice. We also consider the case of new experimentation programs without a strong prior on treatment effects. Finally, we discuss the implications of these results on experimentation programs in industry. For example, under no-cost assumptions, firms should be testing many more ideas, reducing test allocation sizes, and relaxing p-value thresholds away from p = 0.05. These results are exemplified with an application to data from Netflix experimentation programs. A draft of the paper may be found at https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.05508.
Timothy Sudijono, Simon Ejdemyr, Apoorva Lal, Martin Tingley
EC4