Researcher profile

Alicia Vidler

Alicia Vidler contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
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

3 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

A Harmonic Mean Formulation of Average Reward Reinforcement Learning in SMDPs

Recent research has revived and amplified interest in algorithms for undiscounted average reward reinforcement learning in infinite-horizon, non-episodic (continuing) tasks. Semi-Markov decision processes (SMDPs) are of particular interest. In SMDPs, discrete actions stochastically generate both rewards and durations, and the objective is to optimize the average reward rate. Existing algorithms approach this by optimizing the ratio of rewards to durations. However, when rewards and durations are non-stationary (in the infinite horizon), this can be incorrect. This paper presents a novel modified harmonic mean operator that correctly computes reward rates even under such conditions. This yields model-free learning algorithms that can work with SMDPs, while maintaining robustness to non-stationary reward and duration distributions over time. We prove theoretical properties of the modified harmonic mean operator, and empirically demonstrate its efficacy in comparison to existing algorithms.

preprint2026arXiv

Multiagent Reinforcement Learning for Liquidity Games

Making use of swarm methods in financial market modeling of liquidity, and techniques from financial analysis in swarm analysis, holds the potential to advance both research areas. In swarm research, the use of game theory methods holds the promise of explaining observed phenomena of collective utility adherence with rational self-interested swarm participants. In financial markets, a better understanding of how independent financial agents may self-organize for the betterment and stability of the marketplace would be a boon for market design researchers. This paper unifies Liquidity Games, where trader payoffs depend on aggregate liquidity within a trade, with Rational Swarms, where decentralized agents use difference rewards to align self-interested learning with global objectives. We offer a theoretical frameworks where we define a swarm of traders whose collective objective is market liquidity provision while maintaining agent independence. Using difference rewards within a Markov team games framework, we show that individual liquidity-maximizing behaviors contribute to overall market liquidity without requiring coordination or collusion. This Financial Swarm model provides a framework for modeling rational, independent agents where they achieve both individual profitability and collective market efficiency in bilateral asset markets.

preprint2022arXiv

What Type of Explanation Do Rejected Job Applicants Want? Implications for Explainable AI

Rejected job applicants seldom receive explanations from employers. Techniques from Explainable AI (XAI) could provide explanations at scale. Although XAI researchers have developed many different types of explanations, we know little about the type of explanations job applicants want. We use a survey of recent job applicants to fill this gap. Our survey generates three main insights. First, the current norm of, at most, generic feedback frustrates applicants. Second, applicants feel the employer has an obligation to provide an explanation. Third, job applicants want to know why they were unsuccessful and how to improve.