Maximizing Revenue under Market Shrinkage and Market Uncertainty

Authors: Maria-Florina F. Balcan, Siddharth Prasad, Tuomas Sandholm

NeurIPS 2022 | Conference PDF | Archive PDF | Plain Text | LLM Run Details

Reproducibility Variable Result LLM Response
Research Type Theoretical This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under grants CCF1733556, CCF-1910321, IIS-1901403, and SES-1919453, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency under cooperative agreement HR00112020003, an AWS Machine Learning Research Award, an Amazon Research Award, a Bloomberg Research Grant, and a Microsoft Research Faculty Fellowship. S. Prasad thanks Morgan Mc Carthy for interesting discussions about real-world shrinking (combinatorial) markets.1. For all authors...(a) Do the main claims made in the abstract and introduction accurately reflect the paper s contributions and scope? [Yes](b) Did you describe the limitations of your work? [Yes] We described the limitations of our work in the Conclusions and future research section(c) Did you discuss any potential negative societal impacts of your work? [N/A](d) Have you read the ethics review guidelines and ensured that your paper conforms to them? [Yes]2. If you are including theoretical results...(a) Did you state the full set of assumptions of all theoretical results? [Yes](b) Did you include complete proofs of all theoretical results? [Yes]3. If you ran experiments...(a) Did you include the code, data, and instructions needed to reproduce the main experimental results (either in the supplemental material or as a URL)? [N/A](b) Did you specify all the training details (e.g., data splits, hyperparameters, how they were chosen)? [N/A](c) Did you report error bars (e.g., with respect to the random seed after running experiments multiple times)? [N/A](d) Did you include the total amount of compute and the type of resources used (e.g., type of GPUs, internal cluster, or cloud provider)? [N/A]4. If you are using existing assets (e.g., code, data, models) or curating/releasing new assets...(a) If your work uses existing assets, did you cite the creators? [N/A](b) Did you mention the license of the assets? [N/A](c) Did you include any new assets either in the supplemental material or as a URL? [N/A](d) Did you discuss whether and how consent was obtained from people whose data you re using/curating? [N/A](e) Did you discuss whether the data you are using/curating contains personally identifiable information or offensive content? [N/A]5. If you used crowdsourcing or conducted research with human subjects...(a) Did you include the full text of instructions given to participants and screenshots, if applicable? [N/A](b) Did you describe any potential participant risks, with links to Institutional Review Board (IRB) approvals, if applicable? [N/A](c) Did you include the estimated hourly wage paid to participants and the total amount spent on participant compensation? [N/A]
Researcher Affiliation Collaboration Maria-Florina Balcan School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University ninamf@cs.cmu.edu Siddharth Prasad Computer Science Department Carnegie Mellon University sprasad2@cs.cmu.edu Tuomas Sandholm Computer Science Department Carnegie Mellon University Optimized Markets, Inc. Strategic Machine, Inc. Strategy Robot, Inc. sandholm@cs.cmu.edu
Pseudocode No The paper describes 'Mechanism A' and a 'learning algorithm' in text, but it does not use structured pseudocode blocks or algorithm figures with formal labels.
Open Source Code No The ethics review section explicitly states '[N/A]' for question 3a: 'Did you include the code, data, and instructions needed to reproduce the main experimental results (either in the supplemental material or as a URL)?'.
Open Datasets No The paper is theoretical and does not describe empirical training on a dataset. The ethics review explicitly states '[N/A]' for questions related to experimental data and reproducibility.
Dataset Splits No The paper is theoretical and does not discuss empirical training/validation/test splits. The ethics review explicitly states '[N/A]' for questions related to experimental data splits.
Hardware Specification No The paper is theoretical and does not describe any experimental hardware setup. The ethics review explicitly states '[N/A]' for questions related to compute resources and hardware.
Software Dependencies No The paper is theoretical and does not mention specific software dependencies with version numbers. The ethics review explicitly states '[N/A]' for questions related to training details, which would include software.
Experiment Setup No The paper is theoretical and does not describe an empirical experimental setup with hyperparameters or training configurations. The ethics review explicitly states '[N/A]' for questions related to training details and experimental setup.