Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jean-François Laslier
dblp:81/5467
· DBLP profile ↗
5ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0001-8334-1350ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 3 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 2 · 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
4 papers |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 100% |
Topics — the 8 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
proportional representation |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Reallocating Wasted Votes in Proportional Parliamentary Elections with Thresholds · EC 2025 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
social choice |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Reallocating Wasted Votes in Proportional Parliamentary Elections with Thresholds · EC 2025 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
computational social choice |
0.9 | 2 | 2022 | Approval with Runoff · IJCAI 2022 Multiwinner Approval Rules as Apportionment Methods · AAAI 2017 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice
multiwinner voting |
0.6 | 2 | 2017 | What Do Multiwinner Voting Rules Do? An Experiment Over the Two-Dimensional Euclidean Domain · AAAI 2017 Multiwinner Approval Rules as Apportionment Methods · AAAI 2017 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › proportional representation
apportionment |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Multiwinner Approval Rules as Apportionment Methods · AAAI 2017 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice
axiomatic analysis |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Approval with Runoff · IJCAI 2022 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › restricted preference domains
single-peaked preferences |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | Approval with Runoff · IJCAI 2022 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice › computational social choice › voting rules
approval voting |
0.1 | 1 | 2017 | Multiwinner Approval Rules as Apportionment Methods · AAAI 2017 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
axiomatic analysis · 1.2experimental evaluation · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Reallocating Wasted Votes in Proportional Parliamentary Elections with ThresholdsabstractIn many proportional parliamentary elections, electoral thresholds (typically 3–5%) are used to promote stability and governability by preventing the election of parties with very small representation. However, these thresholds often result in a significant number of "wasted votes" cast for parties that fail to meet the threshold, which reduces representativeness. One proposal is to allow voters to specify replacement votes, by either indicating a second choice party or by ranking a subset of the parties, but there are several ways of deciding on the scores of the parties (and thus the composition of the parliament) given those votes. We introduce a formal model of party voting with thresholds, and compare a variety of party selection rules axiomatically, and experimentally using a dataset we collected during the 2024 European election in France. We identify three particularly attractive rules, called Direct Winners Only (DO), Single Transferable Vote (STV) and Greedy Plurality (GP). Theo Delemazure, Rupert Freeman, Jérôme Lang, Jean-François Laslier, Dominik Peters |
EC | 4 |
| 2022 | Approval with RunoffabstractWe define a family of runoff rules that work as follows: voters cast approval ballots over candidates; two finalists are selected; and the winner is decided by majority. With approval-type ballots, there are various ways to select the finalists. We leverage known approval-based committee rules and study the obtained runoff rules from an axiomatic point of view. Then we analyze the outcome of these rules on single-peaked profiles, and on real data. Theo Delemazure, Jérôme Lang, Jean-François Laslier, M. Remzi Sanver |
IJCAI | 3 |
| 2017 | Multiwinner Approval Rules as Apportionment MethodsabstractWe establish a link between multiwinner elections and apportionment problems by showing how approval-based multiwinner election rules can be interpreted as methods of apportionment. We consider several multi-winner rules and observe that some, but not all, of them induce apportionment methods that are well established in the literature and in the actual practice of proportional representation. For instance, we show that Proportional Approval Voting induces the D'Hondt method and that Monroe's rule induces the largest remainder method. We also consider properties of apportionment methods and exhibit multiwinner rules that induce apportionment methods satisfying these properties. Markus Brill, Jean-François Laslier, Piotr Skowron 0001 |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2017 | What Do Multiwinner Voting Rules Do? An Experiment Over the Two-Dimensional Euclidean DomainabstractWe visualize aggregate outputs of popular multiwinner voting rules — SNTV, STV, Bloc, k-Borda, Monroe, Chamberlin–Courant, and PAV — for elections generated according to the two-dimensional Euclidean model. We consider three applications of multiwinner voting, namely, parliamentary elections, portfolio/movie selection, and shortlisting, and use our results to understand which of our rules seem to be best suited for each application. In particular, we show that STV (one of the few nontrivial rules used in real high-stake elections) exhibits excellent performance, whereas the Bloc rule (also often used in practice) performs poorly. Edith Elkind, Piotr Faliszewski, Jean-François Laslier, Piotr Skowron 0001, Arkadii M. Slinko, Nimrod Talmon |
AAAI | 3 |
| 1994 | The Copeland Measure of Condorcet Choice Functions
Gilbert Laffond, Jean-François Laslier, Michel Le Breton |
Discret. Appl. Math. | 2 |