← Back to paper list

Citation Analysis

% %Off-policy Evaluation with General Logging Policies: \\ % %Implementation at Mercari % Counterfactual Learning with General Data-generating Policies %
Yusuke Narita, Kyohei Okumura, Akihiro Shimizu, Kohei Yata
https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.01925
56
Citation mentions
37
Cited references
15
Sections
11,285
Words (approx)

References by Citation Intensity

Ordered by composite index (descending). Higher values indicate more intensive citation.

# Reference Year Mentions Breadth Sec. Wtd Share Composite Main %
1 Alex Strehl and Langford, John and Li, Lihong and ... 2010 3 1 3.0 0.054 0.585 100%
2 Dud\'\i 2014 3 1 3.0 0.054 0.585 100%
3 Swaminathan, Adith and Joachims, Thorsten 2015 2 1 2.0 0.036 0.511 100%
4 Su, Yi and Dimakopoulou, Maria and Krishnamurthy, ... 2020 2 1 2.0 0.036 0.511 100%
5 Precup, Doina 2000 2 1 2.0 0.036 0.511 100%
6 Farajtabar, Mehrdad and Chow, Yinlam and Ghavamzad... 2018 2 1 2.0 0.036 0.511 100%
7 Li, Lihong and Chu, Wei and Langford, John and Sch... 2010 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
8 Li, Lihong and Chu, Wei and Langford, John and Wan... 2011 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
9 Li, Lihong and Chu, Wei and Langford, John and Moo... 2012 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
10 Le 2013 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
11 Adith Swaminathan and Thorsten Joachims 2015 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
12 Schnabel, Tobias and Swaminathan, Adith and Singh,... 2016 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
13 Wang, Yu-Xiang and Agarwal, Alekh and Dudik, Miros... 2017 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
14 Swaminathan, Adith and Krishnamurthy, Akshay and A... 2017 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
15 Narita, Yusuke and Yasui, Shota and Yata, Kohei (self) 2019 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
16 Bennett, Andrew and Kallus, Nathan 2019 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
17 Uehara, Masatoshi and Kato, Masahiro and Yasui, Sh... 2020 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
18 Yuta Saito and Shunsuke Aihara and Megumi Matsutan... (self) 2021 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
19 Jiang, Nan and Li, Lihong 2016 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
20 Philip Thomas and Emma Brunskill 2016 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
21 Liu, Yao and Gottesman, Omer and Raghu, Aniruddh a... 2018 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
22 Alex Irpan and Kanishka Rao and Konstantinos Bousm... 2019 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
23 Kallus, Nathan and Uehara, Masatoshi 2020 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
24 Uehara, Masatoshi and Huang, Jiawei and Jiang, Nan 2020 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
25 Sachdeva, Noveen and Su, Yi and Joachims, Thorsten 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
26 Rosenbaum, Paul R and Rubin, Donald B 1983 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
27 Wager, Stefan and Athey, Susan 2018 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
28 Beygelzimer, Alina and Langford, John 2009 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
29 Duan, Yaqi and Jia, Zeyu and Wang, Mengdi 2020 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
30 Narita, Yusuke and Yata, Kohei (self) 2022 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
31 Lee, David S. and Lemieux, Thomas 2010 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
32 Kuzborskij, Ilja and Vernade, Claire and Gyorgy, A... 1 1 1.0 0.018 0.406 100%
33 Angrist, Joshua D. and Pischke, Jo 2008 1 1 2.0 0.018 0.406 100%
34 Peter Hull 2018 1 1 2.0 0.018 0.406 100%
35 Crasta, Graziano and Malusa, Annalisa 2007 9 1 4.5 0.161 0.149 0%
36 Steven G. Krantz and Harold R. Parks 2008 4 1 2.0 0.071 0.139 0%
37 Shengqiao Li 2011 1 1 0.5 0.018 0.087 0%
Measures: Mentions = total in-text citations; Breadth = distinct sections; Sec. Wtd = section-weighted count (body ×2, lit review/appendix ×0.5); Share = mentions / total citations in paper; Composite = geometric mean of normalised count, breadth, and main-text ratio; Main % = fraction of mentions in main text (excl. appendix). (self) = self-citation.

Citation intensity data generated from LaTeX source analysis.