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

Ryan Porter

dblp:45/4370 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
10ranked-venue papers
7as first author
0since 2021 · last 2008
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 8 · 7 first-authorTheory of computation · 5 · 3 first-authorComputer networks · 1Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author

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
6 papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 100%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Electronic design automation · 50% Embedded and real-time systems · 50%

Topics — the 15 heaviest of 16, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
mechanism design
0.132008
Fault tolerant mechanism design · Artif. Intell. 2008
Mechanism design for online real-time scheduling · EC 2004
Smoothing out focused demand for network resources · EC 2001
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
incentive compatibility
0.012004
Mechanism design for online real-time scheduling · EC 2004
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
market design
0.012004
Designing efficient online trading systems · EC 2004
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › equilibrium computation
nash equilibrium computation
0.012004
Simple Search Methods for Finding a Nash Equilibrium · AAAI 2004
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › algorithmic mechanism design
online mechanism design
0.012004
Mechanism design for online real-time scheduling · EC 2004
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design
truthful mechanism
0.012004
Mechanism design for online real-time scheduling · EC 2004
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
auction theory
0.012003
On cheating in sealed-bid auctions · EC 2003
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › auction theory › sealed-bid auction
first-price auction
0.012003
On cheating in sealed-bid auctions · EC 2003
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › auction theory
sealed-bid auction
0.012003
On cheating in sealed-bid auctions · EC 2003
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › auction design
second-price auction
0.012003
On cheating in sealed-bid auctions · EC 2003
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
congestion games
0.012001
Smoothing out focused demand for network resources · EC 2001
Embedded and real-time systems
real-time scheduling
0.012004
Mechanism design for online real-time scheduling · EC 2004
Electronic design automation › high-level synthesis
scheduling
0.012004
Mechanism design for online real-time scheduling · EC 2004
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › market design
electronic commerce
0.012004
Designing efficient online trading systems · EC 2004
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design › mechanism design › public good provision
cost-sharing mechanisms
0.012001
Smoothing out focused demand for network resources · EC 2001

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

search methods · 0.1payment scheme · 0.1competitive ratio analysis · 0.1equilibrium analysis · 0.1mechanism design · 0.0game-theoretic modeling · 0.0game theory · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2008 Fault tolerant mechanism design
Ryan Porter, Amir Ronen, Yoav Shoham, Moshe Tennenholtz
Artif. Intell.1
2005 On cheating in sealed-bid auctions
Ryan Porter, Yoav Shoham
Decis. Support Syst.1
2004 Simple Search Methods for Finding a Nash Equilibrium
Ryan Porter, Eugene Nudelman, Yoav Shoham
AAAI1
2004 Mechanism design for online real-time scheduling
abstract
For the problem of online real-time scheduling of jobs on a single processor, previous work presents matching upper and lower bounds on the competitive ratio that can be achieved by a deterministic algorithm. However, these results only apply to the non-strategic setting in which the jobs are released directly to the algorithm. Motivated by emerging areas such as grid computing, we instead consider this problem in an economic setting, in which each job is released to a separate, self-interested agent. The agent can then delay releasing the job to the algorithm, inflate its length, and declare an arbitrary value and deadline for the job, while the center determines not only the schedule, but the payment of each agent. For the resulting mechanism design problem (in which we also slightly strengthen an assumption from the non-strategic setting), we present a mechanism that addresses each incentive issue, while only increasing the competitive ratio by one. We then show a matching lower bound for deterministic mechanisms that never pay the agents.
Ryan Porter
EC1
2004 Designing efficient online trading systems
abstract
No abstract available.
Ryan Porter, Yoav Shoham
EC1
2003 On cheating in sealed-bid auctions
abstract
Motivated by the rise of online auctions and their relative lack of security, this paper analyzes two forms of cheating in sealed-bid auctions. The first type of cheating we consider occurs when the seller spies on the bids of a second-price auction and then inserts a fake bid in order to increase the payment of the winning bidder. In the second type, a bidder cheats in a first-price auction by examining the competing bids before deciding on his own bid. In both cases, we derive equilibrium strategies when bidders are aware of the possibility of cheating. These results provide insights into sealed-bid auctions even in the absence of cheating, including some counterintuitive results on the effects of overbidding in a first-price auction.footnotetext[1]This work was supported in part by DARPA grant F30602-00-2-0598.
Ryan Porter, Yoav Shoham
EC1
2003 Towards a general theory of non-cooperative computation
abstract
We generalize the framework of non-cooperative computation (NCC), recently introduced by Shoham and Tennenholtz, to apply to cryptographic situations. We consider functions whose inputs are held by separate, self-interested agents. We consider four components of each agent's utility function: (a) the wish to know the correct value of the function, (b) the wish to prevent others from knowing it, (c) the wish to prevent others from knowing one's own private input, and (d) the wish to know other agents' private inputs. We provide an exhaustive game theoretic analysis of all 24 possible lexicographic orderings among these four considerations, for the case of Boolean functions (mercifully, these 24 cases collapse to four). In each case we identify the class of functions for which there exists an incentive-compatible mechanism for computing the function. In this article we only consider the situation in which the inputs of different agents are probabilistically independent.
Robert McGrew 0001, Ryan Porter, Yoav Shoham
TARK2
2003 Incentive mechanisms for smoothing out a focused demand for network resources
Kevin Leyton-Brown, Ryan Porter, Balaji Prabhakar, Yoav Shoham, Shobha Venkataraman
Comput. Commun.2
2002 Mechanism Design with Execution Uncertainty
Ryan Porter, Amir Ronen, Yoav Shoham, Moshe Tennenholtz
UAI1
2001 Smoothing out focused demand for network resources
abstract
We explore the problem of sharing network resources when agents' preferences lead to temporally concentrated, inefficient use of the network. In such cases, external incentives must be supplied to smooth out demand. Taking a game-theoretic approach, we consider a setting in which bandwidth is available during several time slots at a fixed cost, but all agents have a natural preference for choosing the same slot. We present four mechanisms that motivate agents to distribute load optimally by probabilistically waiving the cost for each time slot, and analyze equilibria.
Kevin Leyton-Brown, Ryan Porter, Shobha Venkataraman, Balaji Prabhakar
EC2