BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Alexis Tsoukiàs

Alexis Tsoukiàs contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
cs.CYArtificial Intelligenceecon.GNq-fin.EC

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2023arXiv

What is a decision problem?

This paper presents a general framework about what is a decision problem. Our motivation is related to the fact that decision analysis and operational research are structured (as disciplines) around classes of methods, while instead we should first characterise the decision problems our clients present us. For this purpose we introduce a new framework, independent from any existing method, based upon primitives provided by (or elicited from) the client. We show that the number of archetypal decision problems are finite and so the archetypal decision support methods.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Fairness and Explainability in Automatic Decision-Making Systems. A challenge for computer science and law

The paper offers a contribution to the interdisciplinary constructs of analyzing fairness issues in automatic algorithmic decisions. Section 1 shows that technical choices in supervised learning have social implications that need to be considered. Section 2 proposes a contextual approach to the issue of unintended group discrimination, i.e. decision rules that are facially neutral but generate disproportionate impacts across social groups (e.g., gender, race or ethnicity). The contextualization will focus on the legal systems of the United States on the one hand and Europe on the other. In particular, legislation and case law tend to promote different standards of fairness on both sides of the Atlantic. Section 3 is devoted to the explainability of algorithmic decisions; it will confront and attempt to cross-reference legal concepts (in European and French law) with technical concepts and will highlight the plurality, even polysemy, of European and French legal texts relating to the explicability of algorithmic decisions. The conclusion proposes directions for further research.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Is there an Ethical Operational Research?

The ethical dimension of Operational Research and Decision Aiding, although not a new subject, turns to be a concern, both for the large public and the OR community, because of the wide spread of autonomous artefacts endowed with decision capacity thanks to the use of models, methods and tools developed within our field. The paper addresses the question of whether there exists an "Ethical Operational Research", identifies the ethical questions which are specific to our professional community and suggests research topics which, although independently developed, are relevant for handling such questions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

What is Legitimate Decision Support?

Decision support is the science and associated practice that consist in providing recommendations to decision makers facing problems, based on available theoretical knowledge and empirical data. Although this activity is often seen as being concerned with solving mathematical problems and conceiving algorithms, it is essentially an empirical and socially framed activity, where interactions between clients and analysts, and between them and concerned third parties, play a crucial role. Since the 80s, two concepts have structured the literature devoted to analysing this aspect of decision support: validity and legitimacy. Whereas validity is focused on the interactions between the client and the analyst, legitimacy refers to the broader picture: the organisational context, the overall problem situation, the environment, culture, history. Despite its importance, this concept has not received the attention it deserves in the literature in decision support. The present paper aims at filling this gap. For that purpose, we review the literature in other disciplines relevant to elaborate a concept of legitimacy useful in decision support contexts. Based on this review, we propose a general theory of legitimacy, adapted to decision support contexts, encompassing the relevant contributions we found in the literature. According to this general theory, a legitimate decision support intervention is one for which the decision support provider produces a justification that satisfies two conditions: (i) it effectively convinces the decision support provider's interlocutors (effectiveness condition) and (ii) it is organised around the active elicitation of as many and as diverse counterarguments as possible (truthfulness condition). Despite its conceptual simplicity, legitimacy, understood in this sense, is a very exacting requirement, opening ambitious research avenues that we delineate.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Is the Capability approach a useful tool for decision aiding in public policy making?

This paper aims at proposing a model representing individuals' welfare using Sen's capability approach (CA). It is the first step of an attempt to measure the negative impact caused by the damage at a Common on a given population's welfare, and widely speaking, a first step into modelling collective threat. The CA is a multidimensional representation of persons' well-beings which account for human diversity. It has received substantial attention from scholars from different disciplines such as philosophy, economics and social scientist. Nevertheless, there is no empirical work that really fits the theoretical framework. Our goal is to show that the capability approach can be very useful for decision aiding, especially if we fill the gap between the theory and the empirical work; thus we will propose a framework that is both usable and a close representation of what capability is.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access