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

Ariel Shaulker

dblp:270/0805 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0003-2758-0578ORCID · corroborated

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

Theory of computation · 4 · 4 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 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
3 papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 100%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
mechanism design
2.532025
Multi-parameter Mechanisms for Consumer Surplus Maximization · STOC 2025
Bilateral Trade with Interdependent Values: Information vs. Approximation · EC 2025
Bilateral Trade with Correlated Values · STOC 2024
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
welfare maximization
1.722025
Multi-parameter Mechanisms for Consumer Surplus Maximization · STOC 2025
Bilateral Trade with Interdependent Values: Information vs. Approximation · EC 2025
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
bilateral trade
1.622025
Bilateral Trade with Interdependent Values: Information vs. Approximation · EC 2025
Bilateral Trade with Correlated Values · STOC 2024
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › algorithmic mechanism design
approximation mechanisms
0.912025
Bilateral Trade with Interdependent Values: Information vs. Approximation · EC 2025
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › auction theory
interdependent values
0.912025
Bilateral Trade with Interdependent Values: Information vs. Approximation · EC 2025
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › bayesian mechanism design
bayesian incentive compatibility
0.812024
Bilateral Trade with Correlated Values · STOC 2024
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
social welfare
0.212024
Bilateral Trade with Correlated Values · STOC 2024

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

bayesian mechanism design · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Bilateral Trade with Interdependent Values: Information vs. Approximation
abstract
Welfare maximization in bilateral trade has been extensively studied in recent years. Previous literature obtained incentive-compatible approximation mechanisms only for the private values case. In this paper, we study welfare maximization in bilateral trade with interdependent values. Designing mechanisms for interdependent settings is much more challenging because the values of the players depend on the private information of the others, requiring complex belief updates and strategic inference.
Shahar Dobzinski, Alon Eden, Kira Goldner, Ariel Shaulker, Thodoris Tsilivis
EC4
2025 Multi-parameter Mechanisms for Consumer Surplus Maximization
Tomer Ezra, Daniel Schoepflin 0001, Ariel Shaulker
STOC3
2024 Bilateral Trade with Correlated Values
abstract
We study the bilateral trade problem where a seller owns a single indivisible item, and a potential buyer seeks to purchase it. Previous mechanisms for this problem only considered the case where the values of the buyer and the seller are drawn from independent distributions. In contrast, this paper studies bilateral trade mechanisms when the values are drawn from a joint distribution. We prove that the buyer-offering mechanism guarantees an approximation ratio of e/e−1 ≈ 1.582 to the social welfare even if the values are drawn from a joint distribution. The buyer-offering mechanism is Bayesian incentive compatible, but the seller has a dominant strategy. We prove the buyer-offering mechanism is optimal in the sense that no Bayesian mechanism where one of the players has a dominant strategy can obtain an approximation ratio better than e/e−1. We also show that no mechanism in which both sides have a dominant strategy can provide any constant approximation to the social welfare when the values are drawn from a joint distribution. Finally, we prove some impossibility results on the power of general Bayesian incentive compatible mechanisms. In particular, we show that no deterministic Bayesian incentive-compatible mechanism can provide an approximation ratio better than 1+ln2/2≈ 1.346.
Shahar Dobzinski, Ariel Shaulker
STOC2
2023 Rigidity in Mechanism Design and Its Applications
Shahar Dobzinski, Ariel Shaulker
ITCS2