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

Eyal Winter

dblp:93/11277 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
0000-0002-4318-1759ORCID · verified

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 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
2 papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
mechanism design
0.612022
Optimal Collaterals in Multi-Enterprise Investment Networks · WWW 2022
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
network games
0.612022
Optimal Collaterals in Multi-Enterprise Investment Networks · WWW 2022
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
nash implementation
0.212014
Contract complexity · EC 2014
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › cooperative game theory
solution concepts
0.212014
Contract complexity · EC 2014

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

nash equilibrium analysis · 0.6game-theoretic characterization · 0.2complexity analysis · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Optimal Collaterals in Multi-Enterprise Investment Networks
abstract
We study a market of investments on networks, where each agent (vertex) can invest in any enterprise linked to her, and at the same time, raise capital for her firm’s enterprise from other agents she is linked to. Failing to raise sufficient capital results with the firm defaulting, being unable to invest in others. Our main objective is to examine the role of collateral contracts in handling the strategic risk that can propagate to a systemic risk throughout the network in a cascade of defaults. We take a mechanism-design approach and solve for the optimal scheme of collateral contracts that capital raisers offer their investors. These contracts aim at sustaining the efficient level of investment as a unique Nash equilibrium, while minimizing the total collateral.
Moshe Babaioff, Yoav Kolumbus, Eyal Winter
WWW3
2014 Contract complexity
abstract
We study the complexity required for the implementation of multi-agent contracts under a variety of solution concepts. A contract is a mapping from strategy profiles to outcomes. Practical implementation of a contract requires it to be ''simple'', an illusive concept that needs to be formalized. A major source of complexity is the burden involving verifying the contract fulfillment (for example in a court of law). Contracts which specify a small number of outcomes are easier to verify and are less prone to disputes. We therefore measure the complexity of a contract by the number of outcomes it specifies. Our approach is general in the sense that all strategic interaction represented by a normal form game are allowed. The class of solution concepts we consider is rather exhaustive and includes Nash equilibrium with both pure and mixed strategies, dominant strategy implementation, iterative elimination of dominated strategies and strong equilibria.
Moshe Babaioff, Eyal Winter
EC2