These Papers are Using PrefLib
Below is a list of papers that have made use of or directly referenced data stored here at PrefLib. The papers have been automatically added from Google Scholar, if there is a problem with a paper or if you want to add one paper, please contact us.
- Mechanisms for Online Organ Matching.. N Mattei, A Saffidine, T Walsh, Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2017).
- Monotonicity-based consensus states for the monometric rationalisation of ranking rules and how they are affected by ties. R Pérez-Fernández, P Alonso, I Díaz, S Montes et al., International Journal of Approximate Reasoning (2017).
- On maximum weight clique algorithms, and how they are evaluated. C McCreesh, P Prosser, K Simpson et al., Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (2017).
- Parliamentary voting procedures: Agenda control, manipulation, and uncertainty. R Bredereck, J Chen, R Niedermeier, T Walsh, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (2017).
- Robustness among multiwinner voting rules. R Bredereck, P Faliszewski, A Kaczmarczyk et al., Proceedings of the International Symposium on Algorithmic Game Theory (2017).
- Robustness Among Multiwinner Voting Rules. R Niedermeier, P Skowron et al., Proceedings of the International Symposium on Algorithmic Game Theory (2017).
- Social Choice on the Web. S Bouveret, Trends in Computational Social Choice (2017).
- Subset selection via implicit utilitarian voting. I Caragiannis, S Nath, AD Procaccia, N Shah, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (2017).
- The complexity of succinct elections. Z Fitzsimmons, E Hemaspaandra, Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2017).
- Uniform random generation and dominance testing for CP-nets. TE Allen, J Goldsmith, HE Justice, N Mattei et al., Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (2017).
- Utopia in the solution of the bucket order problem. JA Aledo, JA Gámez, A Rosete, Decision Support Systems (2017).
- Voting by sequential elimination with few voters.. S Bouveret, Y Chevaleyre, F Durand, J Lang, Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2017).
- Analyzing the practical relevance of voting paradoxes via Ehrhart theory, computer simulations, and empirical data. F Brandt, C Geist, M Strobel, Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2016).
- Between fairness and a mistrial: Consensus under a deadline. M Bannikova, L Naamani-Dery et al., Proceedings of the Workshop on Advances in Preference Handling (2016).
- Complexity of finding equilibria of plurality voting under structured preferences. E Elkind, E Markakis, S Obraztsova et al., Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2016).
Even more references, papers, and tutorials can be found in the proceedings of the EXPLORE Workshops:
Some Tools to Work with Preferences
Empirical experiments with real data are becoming a more fundamental part of work in computational social choice. In addition to a lightweight set of tools for working with data from PrefLib we also host documentation for several of these project. Please contact Nick if you have code that you would like to share with the community.
This is a voting simulator built for the paper A Local-Dominance Theory of Voting Equilibria. We are releasing its source code to be expanded and enhanced by the community. However, it is quite versatile in its current construction, and can be used for various simulations "as is".
Kidney failure is a life-threatening health issue that affects hundreds of thousands of people worldwide. In the US alone, the waitlist for a kidney transplant has over 100,000 patients. This list is growing: demand far outstrips supply.This codebase includes: structural elements of kidney exchange like "pools", "hospitals", and "pairs", a couple of kidney exchange graph generators, a couple of kidney exchange solvers (max weight, failure-aware, fairness-aware, individually rational), and a dynamic kidney exchange simulator.
CRISNER stands for Conditional and Relative Importance Statement Network PrEference Reasoner. It can reason about ceteris paribus preference languages such as CP-nets, TCP-nets and CP-theories. Given a preference specification (a set of preference statements) in one of these languages, CRISNER succinctly encodes its induced preference graph (IPG) into a Kripke structure model in the language of the NuSMV model checker. This Kripke model is reachability-equivalent to the induced preference graph. CRISNER generates the model only once, and then translates each query posed against this preference specification into a temporal logic formula in computation-tree temporal logic (CTL) such that the formula is verified in the Kripke model if and only if the query holds true according to the ceteris paribus semantics of the preference language. The model checker either affirms the query or returns with a counterexample. For answering queries related to equivalence and subsumption checking of two sets of preferences, CRISNER constructs a combined IPG and uses temporal queries in CTL to identify whether every dominance that holds in one also holds in the other, and vice-versa.