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

Shuchi Chawla

Shuchi Chawla contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computer Science and Game TheoryData Structures and AlgorithmsApplicationsDigital Librariesecon.TH

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
9works
0followers
5topics
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

9 published item(s)

preprint2025arXiv

To ArXiv or not to ArXiv: A Study Quantifying Pros and Cons of Posting Preprints Online

Double-blind conferences have engaged in debates over whether to allow authors to post their papers online on arXiv or elsewhere during the review process. Independently, some authors of research papers face the dilemma of whether to put their papers on arXiv due to its pros and cons. We conduct a study to substantiate this debate and dilemma via quantitative measurements. Specifically, we conducted surveys of reviewers in two top-tier double-blind computer science conferences -- ICML 2021 (5361 submissions and 4699 reviewers) and EC 2021 (498 submissions and 190 reviewers). Our three main findings are as follows. First, more than a third of the reviewers self-report searching online for a paper they are assigned to review. Second, conference policies restricting authors from publicising their work on social media or posting preprints before the review process may have only limited effectiveness in maintaining anonymity. Third, outside the review process, we find that preprints from better-ranked institutions experience a very small increase in visibility compared to preprints from other institutions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Individually-Fair Auctions for Multi-Slot Sponsored Search

We design fair sponsored search auctions that achieve a near-optimal tradeoff between fairness and quality. Our work builds upon the model and auction design of Chawla and Jagadeesan \cite{CJ22}, who considered the special case of a single slot. We consider sponsored search settings with multiple slots and the standard model of click through rates that are multiplicatively separable into an advertiser-specific component and a slot-specific component. When similar users have similar advertiser-specific click through rates, our auctions achieve the same near-optimal tradeoff between fairness and quality as in \cite{CJ22}. When similar users can have different advertiser-specific preferences, we show that a preference-based fairness guarantee holds. Finally, we provide a computationally efficient algorithm for computing payments for our auctions as well as those in previous work, resolving another open direction from \cite{CJ22}.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Mechanism Redesign

This paper develops the theory of mechanism redesign by which an auctioneer can reoptimize an auction based on bid data collected from previous iterations of the auction on bidders from the same market. We give a direct method for estimation of the revenue of a counterfactual auction from the bids in the current auction. The estimator is a simple weighted order statistic of the bids and has the optimal error rate. Two applications of our estimator are A/B testing (a.k.a., randomized controlled trials) and instrumented optimization (i.e., revenue optimization subject to being able to do accurate inference of any counterfactual auction revenue).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Menu-size Complexity and Revenue Continuity of Buy-many Mechanisms

We study the multi-item mechanism design problem where a monopolist sells $n$ heterogeneous items to a single buyer. We focus on buy-many mechanisms, a natural class of mechanisms frequently used in practice. The buy-many property allows the buyer to interact with the mechanism multiple times instead of once as in the more commonly studied buy-one mechanisms. This imposes additional incentive constraints and thus restricts the space of mechanisms that the seller can use. In this paper, we explore the qualitative differences between buy-one and buy-many mechanisms focusing on two important properties: revenue continuity and menu-size complexity. Our first main result is that when the value function of the buyer is perturbed multiplicatively by a factor of $1\pmε$, the optimal revenue obtained by buy-many mechanisms only changes by a factor of $1 \pm \textrm{poly}(n,ε)$. In contrast, for buy-one mechanisms, the revenue of the resulting optimal mechanism after such a perturbation can change arbitrarily. Our second main result shows that under any distribution of arbitrary valuations, finite menu size suffices to achieve a $(1-ε)$-approximation to the optimal buy-many mechanism. We give tight upper and lower bounds on the number of menu entries as a function of $n$ and $ε$. On the other hand, such a result fails to hold for buy-one mechanisms as even for two items and a buyer with either unit-demand or additive valuations, the menu-size complexity of approximately optimal mechanisms is unbounded.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Pandora's Box with Correlations: Learning and Approximation

The Pandora's Box problem and its extensions capture optimization problems with stochastic input where the algorithm can obtain instantiations of input random variables at some cost. To our knowledge, all previous work on this class of problems assumes that different random variables in the input are distributed independently. As such it does not capture many real-world settings. In this paper, we provide the first approximation algorithms for Pandora's Box-type problems with correlations. We assume that the algorithm has access to samples drawn from the joint distribution on input. Algorithms for these problems must determine an order in which to probe random variables, as well as when to stop and return the best solution found so far. In general, an optimal algorithm may make both decisions adaptively based on instantiations observed previously. Such fully adaptive (FA) strategies cannot be efficiently approximated to within any sublinear factor with sample access. We therefore focus on the simpler objective of approximating partially adaptive (PA) strategies that probe random variables in a fixed predetermined order but decide when to stop based on the instantiations observed. We consider a number of different feasibility constraints and provide simple PA strategies that are approximately optimal with respect to the best PA strategy for each case. All of our algorithms have polynomial sample complexity. We further show that our results are tight within constant factors: better factors cannot be achieved even using the full power of FA strategies.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

A/B Testing of Auctions

For many application areas A/B testing, which partitions users of a system into an A (control) and B (treatment) group to experiment between several application designs, enables Internet companies to optimize their services to the behavioral patterns of their users. Unfortunately, the A/B testing framework cannot be applied in a straightforward manner to applications like auctions where the users (a.k.a., bidders) submit bids before the partitioning into the A and B groups is made. This paper combines auction theoretic modeling with the A/B testing framework to develop methodology for A/B testing auctions. The accuracy of our method %, assuming the auction is directly comparable to ideal A/B testing where there is no interference between A and B. Our results are based on an extension and improved analysis of the inference method of Chawla et al. (2014).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Sequential Posted Pricing and Multi-parameter Mechanism Design

We consider the classical mathematical economics problem of {\em Bayesian optimal mechanism design} where a principal aims to optimize expected revenue when allocating resources to self-interested agents with preferences drawn from a known distribution. In single-parameter settings (i.e., where each agent's preference is given by a single private value for being served and zero for not being served) this problem is solved [Myerson '81]. Unfortunately, these single parameter optimal mechanisms are impractical and rarely employed [Ausubel and Milgrom '06], and furthermore the underlying economic theory fails to generalize to the important, relevant, and unsolved multi-dimensional setting (i.e., where each agent's preference is given by multiple values for each of the multiple services available) [Manelli and Vincent '07]. In contrast to the theory of optimal mechanisms we develop a theory of sequential posted price mechanisms, where agents in sequence are offered take-it-or-leave-it prices. These mechanisms are approximately optimal in single-dimensional settings, and avoid many of the properties that make optimal mechanisms impractical. Furthermore, these mechanisms generalize naturally to give the first known approximations to the elusive optimal multi-dimensional mechanism design problem. In particular, we solve multi-dimensional multi-unit auction problems and generalizations to matroid feasibility constraints. The constant approximations we obtain range from 1.5 to 8. For all but one case, our posted price sequences can be computed in polynomial time.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

The power of randomness in Bayesian optimal mechanism design

We investigate the power of randomness in the context of a fundamental Bayesian optimal mechanism design problem--a single seller aims to maximize expected revenue by allocating multiple kinds of resources to "unit-demand" agents with preferences drawn from a known distribution. When the agents' preferences are single-dimensional Myerson's seminal work [Myerson '81] shows that randomness offers no benefit--the optimal mechanism is always deterministic. In the multi-dimensional case, where each agent's preferences are given by different values for each of the available services, Briest et al. [Briest, Chawla, Kleinberg, and Weinberg '10] recently showed that the gap between the expected revenue obtained by an optimal randomized mechanism and an optimal deterministic mechanism can be unbounded even when a single agent is offered only 4 services. However, this large gap is attained through unnatural instances where values of the agent for different services are correlated in a specific way. We show that when the agent's values involve no correlation or a specific kind of positive correlation, the benefit of randomness is only a small constant factor (4 and 8 respectively). Our model of positively correlated values (that we call additive values) is a natural model for unit-demand agents and items that are substitutes. Our results extend to multiple agent settings as well.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Threshold rules for online sample selection

We consider the following sample selection problem. We observe in an online fashion a sequence of samples, each endowed by a quality. Our goal is to either select or reject each sample, so as to maximize the aggregate quality of the subsample selected so far. There is a natural trade-off here between the rate of selection and the aggregate quality of the subsample. We show that for a number of such problems extremely simple and oblivious "threshold rules" for selection achieve optimal tradeoffs between rate of selection and aggregate quality in a probabilistic sense. In some cases we show that the same threshold rule is optimal for a large class of quality distributions and is thus oblivious in a strong sense.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access