skip to main content
research-article

Fast Shapley Value Computation in Data Assemblage Tasks as Cooperative Simple Games

Published:26 March 2024Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

In this paper, we tackle the challenging problem of Shapley value computation in data markets in a novel setting of data assemblage tasks with binary utility functions among data owners. By modeling these scenarios as cooperative simple games, we leverage pivotal probabilities to transform the computation into a problem of counting beneficiaries. Moreover, we make an insightful observation that the Shapley values can be computed using subsets of minimal syntheses within the inclusion-exclusion framework in combinatorics. Based on this insight, we develop a game decomposition approach and utilize techniques in Boolean function decomposition into disjunctive normal form. One interesting property of our method is that the time complexity depends only on the data owners participating in those minimal syntheses, rather than all the data owners. Extensive experiments with real data sets demonstrate a significant efficiency improvement for computing the Shapley values in data assemblage tasks modeled as simple games.

References

  1. Alessandro Acquisti, Curtis Taylor, and Liad Wagman. 2016. The Economics of Privacy. Journal of Economic Literature 54, 2 (June 2016), 442--92. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.54.2.442Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Anish Agarwal, Munther A. Dahleh, and Tuhin Sarkar. 2019. A Marketplace for Data: An Algorithmic Solution. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, EC 2019, Phoenix, AZ, USA, June 24--28, 2019, Anna Karlin, Nicole Immorlica, and Ramesh Johari (Eds.). ACM, 701--726. https://doi.org/10.1145/3328526.3329589Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Charu C. Aggarwal. 2016. Recommender Systems: The Textbook (1st ed.). Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Charu C. Aggarwal and Philip S. Yu. 2008. Privacy-Preserving Data Mining: A Survey. In Handbook of Database Security: Applications and Trends, Michael Gertz and Sushil Jajodia (Eds.). Springer US, Boston, MA, 431--460. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0--387--48533--1_18Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. William Aiello, Yuval Ishai, and Omer Reingold. 2001. Priced Oblivious Transfer: How to Sell Digital Goods. In Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT 2001, International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptographic Techniques, Innsbruck, Austria, May 6--10, 2001, Proceeding (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2045). Springer, 119--135. https://doi.org/10.1007/3--540--44987--6_8Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Magdalena Balazinska, Bill Howe, and Dan Suciu. 2011. Data Markets in the Cloud: An Opportunity for the Database Community. Proc. VLDB Endow. 4, 12 (2011), 1482--1485. http://www.vldb.org/pvldb/vol4/p1482-balazinska.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Jan C. Bioch. 2002. Modular Decomposition of Boolean Functions. https://ssrn.com/abstract=370984.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Jan C. Bioch. 2005. The complexity of modular decomposition of Boolean functions. Discret. Appl. Math. 149, 1--3 (2005), 1--13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2003.12.010Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Andreas Björklund, Thore Husfeldt, and Mikko Koivisto. 2009. Set Partitioning via Inclusion-Exclusion. SIAM J. Comput. 39, 2 (2009), 546--563. https://doi.org/10.1137/070683933 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1137/070683933Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Jens Bleiholder, Sascha Szott, Melanie Herschel, and Felix Naumann. 2010. Complement union for data integration. In Workshops Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Data Engineering, ICDE 2010, March 1--6, 2010, Long Beach, California, USA. IEEE Computer Society, 183--186. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDEW.2010.5452760Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. George Boole. 1854. An investigation of the laws of thought: on which are founded the mathematical theories of logic and probabilities. Vol. 2. Walton and Maberly.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Frank M. Brown. 1990. Boolean reasoning - the logic of boolean equations. Kluwer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Satya R. Chakravarty, Manipushpak Mitra, and Palash Sarkar. 2014. A Course on Cooperative Game Theory. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415997Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Georgios Chalkiadakis, Edith Elkind, and Michael Wooldridge. 2011. Computational Aspects of Cooperative Game Theory (Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Inetlligence and Machine Learning) (1st ed.). Morgan & Claypool Publishers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Lingjiao Chen, Paraschos Koutris, and Arun Kumar. 2019. Towards Model-based Pricing for Machine Learning in a Data Marketplace. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD Conference 2019, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 30 - July 5, 2019, Peter A. Boncz, Stefan Manegold, Anastasia Ailamaki, Amol Deshpande, and Tim Kraska (Eds.). ACM, 1535--1552. https://doi.org/10.1145/3299869.3300078Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Sara Cohen, Itzhak Fadida, Yaron Kanza, Benny Kimelfeld, and Yehoshua Sagiv. 2006. Full Disjunctions: Polynomial-Delay Iterators in Action. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Seoul, Korea, September 12--15, 2006, Umeshwar Dayal, Kyu-Young Whang, David B. Lomet, Gustavo Alonso, Guy M. Lohman, Martin L. Kersten, Sang Kyun Cha, and Young-Kuk Kim (Eds.). ACM, 739--750. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1164191Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Zicun Cong, Xuan Luo, Jian Pei, Feida Zhu, and Yong Zhang. 2022. Data pricing in machine learning pipelines. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 64, 6 (2022), 1417--1455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-022-01679--4Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. R.D. Cook and Sanford Weisberg. 1980. Characterizations of an Empirical Influence Function for Detecting Influential Cases in Regression. Technometrics 22, 4 (1980), 495--508. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1980.10486199 arXiv:https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00401706.1980.10486199Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Yves Crama and Peter L. Hammer. 2011. Boolean Functions - Theory, Algorithms, and Applications. Encyclopedia of mathematics and its applications, Vol. 142. Cambridge University Press. http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/item6222210/'site_locale=en_GBGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Nilesh N. Dalvi and Dan Suciu. 2007. Efficient query evaluation on probabilistic databases. VLDB J. 16, 4 (2007), 523--544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00778-006-0004--3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. David Dao, Dan Alistarh, Claudiu Musat, and Ce Zhang. 2018. DataBright: Towards a Global Exchange for Decentralized Data Ownership and Trusted Computation. CoRR abs/1802.04780 (2018). arXiv:1802.04780 http://arxiv.org/abs/1802.04780Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Xiaotie Deng and Christos H. Papadimitriou. 1994. On the Complexity of Cooperative Solution Concepts. Mathematics of Operations Research 19, 2 (1994), 257--266. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3690220Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Daniel Deutch, Nave Frost, Benny Kimelfeld, and Mikaël Monet. 2021. Computing the Shapley Value of Facts in Query Answering. CoRR abs/2112.08874 (2021). arXiv:2112.08874 https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.08874Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Xin Luna Dong and Divesh Srivastava. 2015. Big Data Integration. Morgan & Claypool Publishers. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00578ED1V01Y201404DTM040Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Ulrich Faigle and Walter Kern. 1992. The Shapley value for cooperative games under precedence constraints. International Journal of Game Theory 21 (1992), 249--266.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Dan S. Felsenthal and Moshé Machover. 1996. Alternative Forms of the Shapley Value and the Shapley-Shubik Index. Public Choice 87, 3/4 (1996), 315--318. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30027233Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Raul Castro Fernandez, Pranav Subramaniam, and Michael J. Franklin. 2020. Data Market Platforms: Trading Data Assets to Solve Data Problems. Proc. VLDB Endow. 13, 11 (2020), 1933--1947. http://www.vldb.org/pvldb/vol13/p1933-fernandez.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Lisa K. Fleischer and Yu-Han Lyu. 2012. Approximately Optimal Auctions for Selling Privacy When Costs Are Correlated with Data. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (Valencia, Spain) (EC'12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 568--585. https://doi.org/10.1145/2229012.2229054Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Amirata Ghorbani and James Y. Zou. 2019. Data Shapley: Equitable Valuation of Data for Machine Learning. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2019, 9--15 June 2019, Long Beach, California, USA (Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 97), Kamalika Chaudhuri and Ruslan Salakhutdinov (Eds.). PMLR, 2242--2251. http://proceedings.mlr.press/v97/ghorbani19c.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Arpita Ghosh, Katrina Ligett, Aaron Roth, and Grant Schoenebeck. 2014. Buying Private Data without Verification. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (Palo Alto, California, USA) (EC'14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 931--948. https://doi.org/10.1145/2600057.2602902Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Donald B Gillies. 1959. Solutions to general non-zero-sum games. Contributions to the Theory of Games 4, 40 (1959), 47--85.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Andrew V. Goldberg, Jason D. Hartline, and Andrew Wright. 2001. Competitive Auctions and Digital Goods. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (Washington, D.C., USA) (SODA'01). Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, USA, 735--744.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Ian Goodfellow, Yoshua Bengio, and Aaron Courville. 2016. Deep learning. MIT press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Miguel A Hernán and James M Robins. 2010. Causal inference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Nick Hynes, David Dao, David Yan, Raymond Cheng, and Dawn Song. 2018. A Demonstration of Sterling: A Privacy-Preserving Data Marketplace. Proc. VLDB Endow. 11, 12 (Aug. 2018), 2086--2089. https://doi.org/10.14778/3229863.3236266Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Ruoxi Jia, David Dao, Boxin Wang, Frances Ann Hubis, Nezihe Merve Gürel, Bo Li, Ce Zhang, Costas J. Spanos, and Dawn Song. 2019. Efficient Task-Specific Data Valuation for Nearest Neighbor Algorithms. Proc. VLDB Endow. 12, 11 (2019), 1610--1623. https://doi.org/10.14778/3342263.3342637Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Ruoxi Jia, David Dao, Boxin Wang, Frances Ann Hubis, Nick Hynes, Nezihe Merve Gürel, Bo Li, Ce Zhang, Dawn Song, and Costas J. Spanos. 2019. Towards Efficient Data Valuation Based on the Shapley Value. In The 22nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, AISTATS 2019, 16--18 April 2019, Naha, Okinawa, Japan (Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 89), Kamalika Chaudhuri and Masashi Sugiyama (Eds.). PMLR, 1167--1176. http://proceedings.mlr.press/v89/jia19a.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Michael I Jordan and Tom M Mitchell. 2015. Machine learning: Trends, perspectives, and prospects. Science 349, 6245 (2015), 255--260.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Javen Kennedy, Pranav Subramaniam, Sainyam Galhotra, and Raul Castro Fernandez. 2022. Revisiting Online Data Markets in 2022: A Seller and Buyer Perspective. SIGMOD Rec. 51, 3 (nov 2022), 30--37. https://doi.org/10.1145/3572751.3572757Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Aamod Khatiwada, Roee Shraga, Wolfgang Gatterbauer, and Renée J. Miller. 2022. Integrating Data Lake Tables. Proc. VLDB Endow. 16, 4 (2022), 932--945. https://www.vldb.org/pvldb/vol16/p932-khatiwada.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Jon Kleinberg, Christos H Papadimitriou, and Prabhakar Raghavan. 2001. On the value of private information. In Theoretical Aspects Of Rationality And Knowledge: Proceedings of the 8 th conference on Theoretical aspects of rationality and knowledge, Vol. 8. Citeseer, 249--257.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Yann LeCun, Yoshua Bengio, and Geoffrey Hinton. 2015. Deep learning. nature 521, 7553 (2015), 436--444.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Chao Li, Daniel Yang Li, Gerome Miklau, and Dan Suciu. 2015. A Theory of Pricing Private Data. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 39, 4, Article 34 (Dec. 2015), 28 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2691190.2691191Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Ester Livshits, Leopoldo E. Bertossi, Benny Kimelfeld, and Moshe Sebag. 2020. The Shapley Value of Tuples in Query Answering. In 23rd International Conference on Database Theory, ICDT 2020, March 30-April 2, 2020, Copenhagen, Denmark (LIPIcs, Vol. 155), Carsten Lutz and Jean Christoph Jung (Eds.). Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 20:1--20:19. https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICDT.2020.20Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Xuan Luo, Jian Pei, Zicun Cong, and Cheng Xu. 2022. On Shapley Value in Data Assemblage Under Independent Utility. Proc. VLDB Endow. 15, 11 (2022), 2761--2773. https://www.vldb.org/pvldb/vol15/p2761-luo.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Xuan Luo, Jian Pei, Cheng Xu, Wenjie Zhang, and Jianliang Xu. 2024. Fast Shapley Value Computation in Data Assemblage Tasks as Cooperative Simple Games (Technical Report). https://github.com/IDEAL-Lab/shapley-value-simple-game/blob/main/technical_report.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Sasan Maleki, Long Tran-Thanh, Greg Hines, Talal Rahwan, and Alex Rogers. 2013. Bounding the Estimation Error of Sampling-based Shapley Value Approximation With/Without Stratifying. CoRR abs/1306.4265 (2013). arXiv:1306.4265 http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.4265Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Irwin Mann and Lloyd S Shapley. 1960. Values of large games, IV: Evaluating the electoral college by Montecarlo techniques. Rand Corporation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Irwin Mann and Lloyd S Shapley. 1964. The a priori voting strength of the electoral college. Game theory and related approaches to social behavior (1964), 151--164.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Nicholas D Matsakis and Felix S Klock II. 2014. The rust language. In ACM SIGAda Ada Letters, Vol. 34. ACM, 103--104.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Alexandra Meliou, Wolfgang Gatterbauer, Katherine F. Moore, and Dan Suciu. 2010. The Complexity of Causality and Responsibility for Query Answers and non-Answers. Proc. VLDB Endow. 4, 1 (2010), 34--45. https://doi.org/10.14778/1880172.1880176Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Alexandra Meliou, Sudeepa Roy, and Dan Suciu. 2014. Causality and Explanations in Databases. Proc. VLDB Endow. 7, 13 (2014), 1715--1716. https://doi.org/10.14778/2733004.2733070Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Renée J. Miller. 2018. Open Data Integration. Proc. VLDB Endow. 11, 12 (2018), 2130--2139. https://doi.org/10.14778/3229863.3240491Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Xavier Molinero, Fabián Riquelme, and Maria J. Serna. 2015. Forms of representation for simple games: Sizes, conversions and equivalences. Math. Soc. Sci. 76 (2015), 87--102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2015.04.008Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Alexander Muschalle, Florian Stahl, Alexander Löser, and Gottfried Vossen. 2012. Pricing approaches for data markets. In International workshop on business intelligence for the real-time enterprise. Springer, 129--144.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Mark EJ Newman. 2005. Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf's law. Contemporary physics 46, 5 (2005), 323--351.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Kobbi Nissim, Salil Vadhan, and David Xiao. 2014. Redrawing the Boundaries on Purchasing Data from Privacy-Sensitive Individuals. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science (Princeton, New Jersey, USA) (ITCS'14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 411--422. https://doi.org/10.1145/2554797.2554835Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Chaoyue Niu, Zhenzhe Zheng, Fan Wu, Shaojie Tang, Xiaofeng Gao, and Guihai Chen. 2018. Unlocking the Value of Privacy: Trading Aggregate Statistics over Private Correlated Data. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining (London, United Kingdom) (KDD'18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2031--2040. https://doi.org/10.1145/3219819.3220013Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. K. Pantelis and L. Aija. 2013. Understanding the value of (big) data. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Big Data. 38--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Judea Pearl. 2009. Causal inference in statistics: An overview. Statistics surveys 3 (2009), 96--146.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Judea Pearl. 2010. Causal inference. Causality: objectives and assessment (2010), 39--58.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. J. Pei. 2021. A Survey on Data Pricing: from Economics to Data Science. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge & Data Engineering 01 (dec 2021), 1--1. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2020.3045927Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Foster Provost and Tom Fawcett. 2013. Data science and its relationship to big data and data-driven decision making. Big data 1, 1 (2013), 51--59.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Anand Rajaraman and Jeffrey D. Ullman. 1996. Integrating Information by Outerjoins and Full Disjunctions. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, June 3--5, 1996, Montreal, Canada, Richard Hull (Ed.). ACM Press, 238--248. https://doi.org/10.1145/237661.237717Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Paul Resnick and Hal R Varian. 1997. Recommender systems. Commun. ACM 40, 3 (1997), 56--58.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. Babak Salimi, Leopoldo E. Bertossi, Dan Suciu, and Guy Van den Broeck. 2016. Quantifying Causal Effects on Query Answering in Databases. In 8th USENIX Workshop on the Theory and Practice of Provenance, TaPP 2016, Washington, D.C., USA, June 8--9, 2016, Sarah Cohen Boulakia (Ed.). USENIX Association. https://www.usenix.org/conference/tapp16/workshop-program/presentation/salimiGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Fabian Schomm, Florian Stahl, and Gottfried Vossen. 2013. Marketplaces for data: an initial survey. ACM SIGMOD Record 42, 1 (2013), 15--26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. Pierre Senellart, Louis Jachiet, Silviu Maniu, and Yann Ramusat. 2018. ProvSQL: Provenance and Probability Management in PostgreSQL. Proc. VLDB Endow. 11, 12 (2018), 2034--2037. https://doi.org/10.14778/3229863.3236253Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  69. Claude E. Shannon. 1949. The synthesis of two-terminal switching circuits. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 28, 1 (1949), 59--98. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538--7305.1949.tb03624.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  70. LS Shapley. 1967. On committees. In New Methods of Thought and Procedure: Contributions to the Symposium on Methodologies. Springer, 246--270.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Lloyd S. Shapley. 1952. A Value for n-Person Games. Technical Report P-295. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Florian Tramèr, Fan Zhang, Ari Juels, Michael K. Reiter, and Thomas Ristenpart. 2016. Stealing Machine Learning Models via Prediction APIs. In Proceedings of the 25th USENIX Conference on Security Symposium (Austin, TX, USA) (SEC'16). USENIX Association, USA, 601--618.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Fast Shapley Value Computation in Data Assemblage Tasks as Cooperative Simple Games

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Management of Data
      Proceedings of the ACM on Management of Data  Volume 2, Issue 1
      PACMMOD
      February 2024
      1874 pages
      EISSN:2836-6573
      DOI:10.1145/3654807
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2024 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 26 March 2024
      Published in pacmmod Volume 2, Issue 1

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)34
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)34

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader