{"about":{"site":"https://codewithpapers.app","non_affiliation":"Code with Papers and Syntology are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Papers with Code, Meta, or the pwc-archive mirror.","licence":"CC BY-SA 4.0","licence_url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode","attribution":"https://codewithpapers.app/attribution","modified":"archive material modified by Syntology; see the attribution page"},"url":"/paper/on-strategyproof-conference-peer-review","title":"On Strategyproof Conference Peer Review","arxiv_id":"1806.06266","date":"2018-06-16","proceeding":null,"authors":["Yichong Xu","Han Zhao","Xiaofei Shi","Jeremy Zhang","Nihar B. Shah"],"abstract":"We consider peer review in a conference setting where there is typically an overlap between the set of reviewers and the set of authors. This overlap can incentivize strategic reviews to influence the final ranking of one's own papers. In this work, we address this problem through the lens of social choice, and present a theoretical framework for strategyproof and efficient peer review. We first present and analyze an algorithm for reviewer-assignment and aggregation that guarantees strategyproofness and a natural efficiency property called unanimity, when the authorship graph satisfies a simple property. Our algorithm is based on the so-called partitioning method, and can be thought as a generalization of this method to conference peer review settings. We then empirically show that the requisite property on the authorship graph is indeed satisfied in the submission data from the ICLR conference, and further demonstrate a simple trick to make the partitioning method more practically appealing for conference peer review. Finally, we complement our positive results with negative theoretical results where we prove that under various ways of strengthening the requirements, it is impossible for any algorithm to be strategyproof and efficient.","url_abs":"https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.06266v3","url_pdf":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/1806.06266v3.pdf","source":{"archive":"pwc-archive (Hugging Face), CC BY-SA 4.0","snapshot":"2025-07-28","licence_url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode","row_kind":"abstracts"},"code_links":[{"paper_slug":"on-strategyproof-conference-peer-review","repo_url":"https://github.com/xycforgithub/StrategyProof_Conference_Review","is_official":1,"mentioned_in_paper":1,"mentioned_in_github":1,"framework":"none","reach":null}],"tasks":[],"methods":[],"datasets_introduced":[],"methods_introduced":[],"results":[],"syntology":{"syntology_url":"https://syntology.ai/paper/1806.06266","atlas_url":"https://app.syntology.ai/?focus=1806.06266","mcp":{"get_harvested_code_for_paper":{"arxiv_id":"1806.06266"}},"developers":"https://syntology.ai/developers","read_at":"2026-09-25T09:33:49+00:00","read_at_is":"when the build read Syntology's graph, not when any sample ran","claim":"Per-sample execution status on synthesized fixtures; not a correctness claim about the paper. Samples come from repositories linked to the paper, official or community; repo_kind says which.","repos":[{"provenance":"external:paperswithcode_snapshot_2025-07-28","url":"https://github.com/xycforgithub/StrategyProof_Conference_Review","reach":null}],"summary":{"ran_draft_wrong":2},"by_repo_kind":{"official":{"samples":2,"ran":2,"repositories":1}},"repo_kind_vocabulary":{"official":"The archive marks this repository official for the paper","named_in_paper":"The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official","listed":"In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper","found_in_text":"Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted","community":"Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested"},"n_pointer_only_for_licence":0,"samples":[{"code_sha256_prefix":"27ddea40e326122d","entry":"format_name","repo":"xycforgithub/StrategyProof_Conference_Review","repo_kind":"official","path":"DivideClusters/compare_sim.py","file_url":"https://github.com/xycforgithub/StrategyProof_Conference_Review/blob/HEAD/DivideClusters/compare_sim.py","link_basis":"first_harvest_node","language":"python","status":"ran_draft_wrong","verification_level":1,"contract_check":"OUTPUT_MISDECLARED","metamorphic_tier":"deterministic","behaviour_fingerprint":true,"licence":"MIT","inline_ok":true,"mcp_get_code":{"code_sha256":"27ddea40e326122d"}},{"code_sha256_prefix":"dfdef45c2d9ef3ab","entry":"format_paper","repo":"xycforgithub/StrategyProof_Conference_Review","repo_kind":"official","path":"DivideClusters/compare_sim.py","file_url":"https://github.com/xycforgithub/StrategyProof_Conference_Review/blob/HEAD/DivideClusters/compare_sim.py","link_basis":"first_harvest_node","language":"python","status":"ran_draft_wrong","verification_level":1,"contract_check":"OUTPUT_MISDECLARED","metamorphic_tier":"deterministic","behaviour_fingerprint":true,"licence":"MIT","inline_ok":true,"mcp_get_code":{"code_sha256":"dfdef45c2d9ef3ab"}}]},"arxiv_metadata":null,"syntology_extracted_results":null}