Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Shi Feng 0002
dblp:97/1374-2
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
2since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0001-5517-0419ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author · 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.
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Reinforcement learning · 52% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 26% Multi-agent systems · 22% | |
| Theoretical computer science
2 papers |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 100% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
bandit |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Combinatorial Causal Bandits · AAAI 2023 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › multi-armed bandit › structured bandit
causal bandit |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Combinatorial Causal Bandits · AAAI 2023 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
causal inference |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Combinatorial Causal Bandits · AAAI 2023 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems
learning agents |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Peer Prediction for Learning Agents · NeurIPS 2022 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › incentive mechanism design
peer prediction |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Peer Prediction for Learning Agents · NeurIPS 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
maximum likelihood estimation · 1.3linear regression · 1.3do-calculus · 1.3no-regret learning · 1.1follow-the-perturbed-leader · 1.1multiplicative weight updates · 0.6multiplicative weight update · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Combinatorial Causal BanditsabstractIn combinatorial causal bandits (CCB), the learning agent chooses at most K variables in each round to intervene, collects feedback from the observed variables, with the goal of minimizing expected regret on the target variable Y. We study under the context of binary generalized linear models (BGLMs) with a succinct parametric representation of the causal models. We present the algorithm BGLM-OFU for Markovian BGLMs (i.e., no hidden variables) based on the maximum likelihood estimation method and give regret analysis for it. For the special case of linear models with hidden variables, we apply causal inference techniques such as the do calculus to convert the original model into a Markovian model, and then show that our BGLM-OFU algorithm and another algorithm based on the linear regression both solve such linear models with hidden variables. Our novelty includes (a) considering the combinatorial intervention action space and the general causal graph structures including ones with hidden variables, (b) integrating and adapting techniques from diverse studies such as generalized linear bandits and online influence maximization, and (c) avoiding unrealistic assumptions (such as knowing the joint distribution of the parents of Y under all interventions) and regret factors exponential to causal graph size in prior studies. Shi Feng 0002, Wei Chen 0013 |
AAAI | 1 |
| 2022 | Peer Prediction for Learning AgentsabstractPeer prediction refers to a collection of mechanisms for eliciting information from human agents when direct verification of the obtained information is unavailable. They are designed to have a game-theoretic equilibrium where everyone reveals their private information truthfully. This result holds under the assumption that agents are Bayesian and they each adopt a fixed strategy across all tasks. Human agents however are observed in many domains to exhibit learning behavior in sequential settings. In this paper, we explore the dynamics of sequential peer prediction mechanisms when participants are learning agents. We first show that the notion of no regret alone for the agents’ learning algorithms cannot guarantee convergence to the truthful strategy. We then focus on a family of learning algorithms where strategy updates only depend on agents’ cumulative rewards and prove that agents' strategies in the popular Correlated Agreement (CA) mechanism converge to truthful reporting when they use algorithms from this family. This family of algorithms is not necessarily no-regret, but includes several familiar no-regret learning algorithms (e.g multiplicative weight update and Follow the Perturbed Leader) as special cases. Simulation of several algorithms in this family as well as the $\epsilon$-greedy algorithm, which is outside of this family, shows convergence to the truthful strategy in the CA mechanism. Shi Feng 0002, Fang-Yi Yu, Yiling Chen 0001 |
NeurIPS | 1 |