Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Sadie Zhao
dblp:346/1118
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 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% | |
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Multi-agent systems · 67% Reinforcement learning · 33% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems
social choice |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Position: Social Environment Design Should be Further Developed for AI-based Policy-Making · ICML 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
inverse game theory |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Efficient Inverse Multiagent Learning · ICLR 2024 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › market equilibrium
fisher market |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Zero-Sum Stochastic Stackelberg Games · NeurIPS 2022 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
market equilibrium |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Zero-Sum Stochastic Stackelberg Games · NeurIPS 2022 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
stackelberg game |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Zero-Sum Stochastic Stackelberg Games · NeurIPS 2022 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › stackelberg game
stochastic stackelberg games |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Zero-Sum Stochastic Stackelberg Games · NeurIPS 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
stochastic oracle · 1.5simulation · 1.5reinforcement learning · 1.5generative-adversarial optimization · 1.5first-order oracle · 1.5computational social choice · 1.5value iteration · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Efficient Inverse Multiagent LearningabstractIn this paper, we study inverse game theory (resp. inverse multiagent learning) in
which the goal is to find parameters of a game’s payoff functions for which the
expected (resp. sampled) behavior is an equilibrium. We formulate these problems
as generative-adversarial (i.e., min-max) optimization problems, which we develop
polynomial-time algorithms to solve, the former of which relies on an exact first-
order oracle, and the latter, a stochastic one. We extend our approach to solve
inverse multiagent simulacral learning in polynomial time and number of samples.
In these problems, we seek a simulacrum, meaning parameters and an associated
equilibrium that replicate the given observations in expectation. We find that our
approach outperforms the widely-used ARIMA method in predicting prices in
Spanish electricity markets based on time-series data. Denizalp Goktas, Amy Greenwald, Sadie Zhao, Alec Koppel, Sumitra Ganesh |
ICLR | 3 |
| 2024 | Position: Social Environment Design Should be Further Developed for AI-based Policy-MakingabstractArtificial Intelligence (AI) holds promise as a technology that can be used to improve government and economic policy-making. This paper proposes a new research agenda towards this end by introducing Social Environment Design, a general framework for the use of AI in automated policy-making that connects with the Reinforcement Learning, EconCS, and Computational Social Choice communities. The framework seeks to capture general economic environments, includes voting on policy objectives, and gives a direction for the systematic analysis of government and economic policy through AI simulation. We highlight key open problems for future research in AI-based policymaking. By solving these challenges, we hope to achieve various social welfare objectives, thereby promoting more ethical and responsible decision making. Edwin Zhang, Sadie Zhao, Tonghan Wang 0001, Safwan Hossain, Henry Gasztowtt, Stephan Zheng, David C. Parkes, Milind Tambe, Yiling Chen 0001 |
ICML | 2 |
| 2022 | Zero-Sum Stochastic Stackelberg GamesabstractZero-sum stochastic games have found important applications in a variety of fields, from machine learning to economics. Work on this model has primarily focused on the computation of Nash equilibrium due to its effectiveness in solving adversarial board and video games. Unfortunately, a Nash equilibrium is not guaranteed to exist in zero-sum stochastic games when the payoffs at each state are not convex-concave in the players' actions. A Stackelberg equilibrium, however, is guaranteed to exist. Consequently, in this paper, we study zero-sum stochastic Stackelberg games. Going beyond known existence results for (non-stationary) Stackelberg equilibria, we prove the existence of recursive (i.e., Markov perfect) Stackelberg equilibria (recSE) in these games, provide necessary and sufficient conditions for a policy profile to be a recSE, and show that recSE can be computed in (weakly) polynomial time via value iteration. Finally, we show that zero-sum stochastic Stackelberg games can model the problem of pricing and allocating goods across agents and time. More specifically, we propose a zero-sum stochastic Stackelberg game whose recSE correspond to the recursive competitive equilibria of a large class of stochastic Fisher markets. We close with a series of experiments that showcase how our methodology can be used to solve the consumption-savings problem in stochastic Fisher markets. Denizalp Goktas, Sadie Zhao, Amy Greenwald |
NeurIPS | 2 |