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

Shraddha Pathak

dblp:325/4734 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2 · 2 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 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › fair division › envy-freeness
envy-freeness up to one good
1.012026
Non-Monotonicity in Fair Division of Graphs · AAAI 2026
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
fair division
1.012026
Non-Monotonicity in Fair Division of Graphs · AAAI 2026
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › market design
matching markets
0.812024
Strategic Aspects of Stable Matching Markets: A Survey · IJCAI 2024
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › matching
stable matching
0.812024
Strategic Aspects of Stable Matching Markets: A Survey · IJCAI 2024
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › social choice
strategic manipulation
0.812024
Strategic Aspects of Stable Matching Markets: A Survey · IJCAI 2024

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

survey · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Non-Monotonicity in Fair Division of Graphs
abstract
We consider the problem of fairly allocating the vertices of a graph among n agents, where the value of a bundle is determined by its cut value---the number of edges with exactly one endpoint in the bundle. This model naturally captures applications such as team formation and network partitioning, where valuations are inherently non-monotonic: the marginal values may be positive, negative, or zero depending on the composition of the bundle. We focus on the fairness notion of envy-freeness up to one item (EF1) and explore its compatibility with several efficiency concepts such as Transfer Stability (TS) that prohibits any transfer of item that benefit one agent at another's expense. For general graphs, our results uncover a non-monotonic relationship between the number of agents n and the existence of allocations satisfying EF1 and transfer stability (TS): such allocations always exist for n=2, may fail to exist for n=3, but exist again for all n>= 4. We further show that existence can be guaranteed for any n by slightly weakening the efficiency requirement or by restricting the graph to forests. All of our positive results are achieved via efficient algorithms.
Hadi Hosseini, Shraddha Pathak
AAAI2
2024 Strategic Aspects of Stable Matching Markets: A Survey
Hadi Hosseini, Shraddha Pathak
IJCAI2