BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Juba Ziani

Juba Ziani appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Computer Science and Game TheoryMachine Learningcs.CYComputational Engineering, Finance, and ScienceCryptography and SecurityDistributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computingmath.CO

Catalog footprint

What is connected

11works
7topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

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

Published work

11 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Limits of Personalizing Differential Privacy Budgets

A key technical difficulty in differential privacy is selecting a privacy budget that satisfies privacy requirements while maximizing utility. A natural and well-studied workaround is to use personalized privacy budgets, which may differ across agents. In this paper, we show that personalized budgets come with major limitations and that for mean estimation, the dominant factor is not full personalization, but rather choosing the right effective privacy budget. This can be achieved through a simple thresholding operator that we describe. Compared with this thresholding baseline, the gains obtained by fully personalized mechanisms are limited. In particular, we precisely quantify the constant-factor improvement in settings with mixed private and public datasets and in private datasets with two levels of privacy requirements. We also establish upper bounds and identify regimes of maximal gain for arbitrary privacy requirements.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2026arXiv

When Should a Principal Delegate to an Agent in Selection Processes?

Decision-makers in high-stakes selection processes often face a fundamental choice: whether to make decisions themselves or to delegate authority to another entity whose incentives may only be partially aligned with their own. Such delegation arises naturally in settings like graduate admissions, hiring, or promotion, where a principal (e.g. a professor or worker) either reviews applicants personally or decisions are delegated to an agent (e.g. a committee or boss) that evaluates applicants efficiently, but according to a potentially misaligned objective. We study this trade-off in a stylized selection model with noisy signals. The principal incurs a cost for selecting applicants, but can evaluate applicants based on their fit with a project, team, workplace, etc. In contrast, the agent evaluates applicants solely on the basis of a signal that correlates with the principal's metric, but this comes at no cost to the principal. Our goal is to characterize when delegation is beneficial versus when decision-making should remain with the principal. We compare these regimes along three dimensions: (i) the principal's utility, (ii) the quality of the selected applicants according to the principal's metric, and (iii) the fairness of selection outcomes under disparate signal qualities.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Information Discrepancy in Strategic Learning

We initiate the study of the effects of non-transparency in decision rules on individuals' ability to improve in strategic learning settings. Inspired by real-life settings, such as loan approvals and college admissions, we remove the assumption typically made in the strategic learning literature, that the decision rule is fully known to individuals, and focus instead on settings where it is inaccessible. In their lack of knowledge, individuals try to infer this rule by learning from their peers (e.g., friends and acquaintances who previously applied for a loan), naturally forming groups in the population, each with possibly different type and level of information regarding the decision rule. We show that, in equilibrium, the principal's decision rule optimizing welfare across sub-populations may cause a strong negative externality: the true quality of some of the groups can actually deteriorate. On the positive side, we show that, in many natural cases, optimal improvement can be guaranteed simultaneously for all sub-populations. We further introduce a measure we term information overlap proxy, and demonstrate its usefulness in characterizing the disparity in improvements across sub-populations. Finally, we identify a natural condition under which improvement can be guaranteed for all sub-populations while maintaining high predictive accuracy. We complement our theoretical analysis with experiments on real-world datasets.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Optimal Data Acquisition with Privacy-Aware Agents

We study the problem faced by a data analyst or platform that wishes to collect private data from privacy-aware agents. To incentivize participation, in exchange for this data, the platform provides a service to the agents in the form of a statistic computed using all agents' submitted data. The agents decide whether to join the platform (and truthfully reveal their data) or not participate by considering both the privacy costs of joining and the benefit they get from obtaining the statistic. The platform must ensure the statistic is computed differentially privately and chooses a central level of noise to add to the computation, but can also induce personalized privacy levels (or costs) by giving different weights to different agents in the computation as a function of their heterogeneous privacy preferences (which are known to the platform). We assume the platform aims to optimize the accuracy of the statistic, and must pick the privacy level of each agent to trade-off between i) incentivizing more participation and ii) adding less noise to the estimate. We provide a semi-closed form characterization of the optimal choice of agent weights for the platform in two variants of our model. In both of these models, we identify a common nontrivial structure in the platform's optimal solution: an instance-specific number of agents with the least stringent privacy requirements are pooled together and given the same weight, while the weights of the remaining agents decrease as a function of the strength of their privacy requirement. We also provide algorithmic results on how to find the optimal value of the noise parameter used by the platform and of the weights given to the agents.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Gaming Helps! Learning from Strategic Interactions in Natural Dynamics

We consider an online regression setting in which individuals adapt to the regression model: arriving individuals are aware of the current model, and invest strategically in modifying their own features so as to improve the predicted score that the current model assigns to them. Such feature manipulation has been observed in various scenarios -- from credit assessment to school admissions -- posing a challenge for the learner. Surprisingly, we find that such strategic manipulations may in fact help the learner recover the meaningful variables -- that is, the features that, when changed, affect the true label (as opposed to non-meaningful features that have no effect). We show that even simple behavior on the learner's part allows her to simultaneously i) accurately recover the meaningful features, and ii) incentivize agents to invest in these meaningful features, providing incentives for improvement.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Algorithms and Learning for Fair Portfolio Design

We consider a variation on the classical finance problem of optimal portfolio design. In our setting, a large population of consumers is drawn from some distribution over risk tolerances, and each consumer must be assigned to a portfolio of lower risk than her tolerance. The consumers may also belong to underlying groups (for instance, of demographic properties or wealth), and the goal is to design a small number of portfolios that are fair across groups in a particular and natural technical sense. Our main results are algorithms for optimal and near-optimal portfolio design for both social welfare and fairness objectives, both with and without assumptions on the underlying group structure. We describe an efficient algorithm based on an internal two-player zero-sum game that learns near-optimal fair portfolios ex ante and show experimentally that it can be used to obtain a small set of fair portfolios ex post as well. For the special but natural case in which group structure coincides with risk tolerances (which models the reality that wealthy consumers generally tolerate greater risk), we give an efficient and optimal fair algorithm. We also provide generalization guarantees for the underlying risk distribution that has no dependence on the number of portfolios and illustrate the theory with simulation results.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Differentially Private Call Auctions and Market Impact

We propose and analyze differentially private (DP) mechanisms for call auctions as an alternative to the complex and ad-hoc privacy efforts that are common in modern electronic markets. We prove that the number of shares cleared in the DP mechanisms compares favorably to the non-private optimal and provide a matching lower bound. We analyze the incentive properties of our mechanisms and their behavior under natural no-regret learning dynamics by market participants. We include simulation results and connections to the finance literature on market impact.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Pipeline Interventions

We introduce the \emph{pipeline intervention} problem, defined by a layered directed acyclic graph and a set of stochastic matrices governing transitions between successive layers. The graph is a stylized model for how people from different populations are presented opportunities, eventually leading to some reward. In our model, individuals are born into an initial position (i.e. some node in the first layer of the graph) according to a fixed probability distribution, and then stochastically progress through the graph according to the transition matrices, until they reach a node in the final layer of the graph; each node in the final layer has a \emph{reward} associated with it. The pipeline intervention problem asks how to best make costly changes to the transition matrices governing people's stochastic transitions through the graph, subject to a budget constraint. We consider two objectives: social welfare maximization, and a fairness-motivated maximin objective that seeks to maximize the value to the population (starting node) with the \emph{least} expected value. We consider two variants of the maximin objective that turn out to be distinct, depending on whether we demand a deterministic solution or allow randomization. For each objective, we give an efficient approximation algorithm (an additive FPTAS) for constant width networks. We also tightly characterize the "price of fairness" in our setting: the ratio between the highest achievable social welfare and the highest social welfare consistent with a maximin optimal solution. Finally we show that for polynomial width networks, even approximating the maximin objective to any constant factor is NP hard, even for networks with constant depth. This shows that the restriction on the width in our positive results is essential.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Third-Party Data Providers Ruin Simple Mechanisms

Motivated by the growing prominence of third-party data providers in online marketplaces, this paper studies the impact of the presence of third-party data providers on mechanism design. When no data provider is present, it has been shown that simple mechanisms are "good enough" -- they can achieve a constant fraction of the revenue of optimal mechanisms. The results in this paper demonstrate that this is no longer true in the presence of a third-party data provider who can provide the bidder with a signal that is correlated with the item type. Specifically, even with a single seller, a single bidder, and a single item of uncertain type for sale, the strategies of pricing each item-type separately (the analog of item pricing for multi-item auctions) and bundling all item-types under a single price (the analog of grand bundling) can both simultaneously be a logarithmic factor worse than the optimal revenue. Further, in the presence of a data provider, item-type partitioning mechanisms---a more general class of mechanisms which divide item-types into disjoint groups and offer prices for each group---still cannot achieve within a $\log \log$ factor of the optimal revenue. Thus, our results highlight that the presence of a data-provider forces the use of more complicated mechanisms in order to achieve a constant fraction of the optimal revenue.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Joint Data Purchasing and Data Placement in a Geo-Distributed Data Market

This paper studies two design tasks faced by a geo-distributed cloud data market: which data to purchase (data purchasing) and where to place/replicate the data for delivery (data placement). We show that the joint problem of data purchasing and data placement within a cloud data market can be viewed as a facility location problem, and is thus NP-hard. However, we give a provably optimal algorithm for the case of a data market made up of a single data center, and then generalize the structure from the single data center setting in order to develop a near-optimal, polynomial-time algorithm for a geo-distributed data market. The resulting design, Datum, decomposes the joint purchasing and placement problem into two subproblems, one for data purchasing and one for data placement, using a transformation of the underlying bandwidth costs. We show, via a case study, that Datum is near-optimal (within 1.6%) in practical settings.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Clique numbers of graph unions

Let $B$ and $R$ be two simple graphs with vertex set $V$, and let $G(B,R)$ be the simple graph with vertex set $V$, in which two vertices are adjacent if they are adjacent in at least one of $B$ and $R$. For $X \subseteq V$, we denote by $B|X$ the subgraph of $B$ induced by $X$; let $R|X$ and $G(B,R)|X$ be defined similarly. We say that the pair $(B,R)$ is {\em additive} if for every $X \subseteq V$, the sum of the clique numbers of $B|X$ and $R|X$ is at least the clique number of $G(B,R)|X$. In this paper we give a necessary and sufficient characterization of additive pairs of graphs. This is a numerical variant of a structural question studied in \cite{ABC}.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access