Search

We study the problem of allocating a set of indivisible goods to a set of agents with additive valuation functions, aiming to achieve approximate envy-freeness up to any good ($\alpha$-EFX). The state-of-the-art results on the problem include that (exact) EFX allocations exist when (a) there are at most three agents, or (b) the agents' valuation functions can take at most two values, or (c) the agents' valuation functions can be represented via a graph. For $\alpha$-EFX, it is known that a $0.618$-EFX allocation exists for any number of agents with additive valuation functions. In this paper, we show that $2/3$-EFX allocations exist when (a) there are at most \emph{seven agents}, (b) the agents' valuation functions can take at most \emph{three values}, or (c) the agents' valuation functions can be represented via a \emph{multigraph}. Our results can be interpreted in two ways. First, by relaxing the notion of EFX to $2/3$-EFX, we obtain existence results for strict generalizations of the settings for which exact EFX allocations are known to exist. Secondly, by imposing restrictions on the setting, we manage to beat the barrier of $0.618$ and achieve an approximation guarantee of $2/3$. Therefore, our results push the \emph{frontier} of existence and computation of approximate EFX allocations, and provide insights into the challenges of settling the existence of exact EFX allocations., Comment: The conference version of this work has been accepted to the Twenty-Fifth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC 2024)

We study the computational complexity of computing Bayes-Nash equilibria in first-price auctions with discrete value distributions and discrete bidding space, under general subjective beliefs. It is known that such auctions do not always have pure equilibria. In this paper, we prove that the problem of deciding their existence is NP-complete, even for approximate equilibria. On the other hand, it can be shown that mixed equilibria are guaranteed to exist; however, their computational complexity has not been studied before. We establish the PPAD-completeness of computing a mixed equilibrium and we complement this by an efficient algorithm for finding symmetric approximate equilibria in the special case of iid priors. En route to these results, we develop a computational equivalence framework between continuous and discrete first-price auctions, which can be of independent interest, and which allows us to transfer existing positive and negative results from one setting to the other. Finally, we show that correlated equilibria of the auction can be computed in polynomial time., Comment: 54 pages, 2 figures, Published in the 25th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC'24)

We introduce a general technique for proving membership of search problems with exact rational solutions in PPAD, one of the most well-known classes containing total search problems with polynomial-time verifiable solutions. In particular, we construct a "pseudogate", coined the linear-OPT-gate, which can be used as a "plug-and-play" component in a piecewise-linear (PL) arithmetic circuit, as an integral component of the "Linear-FIXP" equivalent definition of the class. The linear-OPT-gate can solve several convex optimization programs, including quadratic programs, which often appear organically in the simplest existence proofs for these problems. This effectively transforms existence proofs to PPAD-membership proofs, and consequently establishes the existence of solutions described by rational numbers. Using the linear-OPT-gate, we are able to significantly simplify and generalize almost all known PPAD-membership proofs for finding exact solutions in the application domains of game theory, competitive markets, auto-bidding auctions, and fair division, as well as to obtain new PPAD-membership results for problems in these domains.

We initiate the study of a novel problem in mechanism design without money, which we term Truthful Interval Covering (TIC). An instance of TIC consists of a set of agents each associated with an individual interval on a line, and the objective is to decide where to place a covering interval to minimize the total social or egalitarian cost of the agents, which is determined by the intersection of this interval with their individual ones. This fundamental problem can model situations of provisioning a public good, such as the use of power generators to prevent or mitigate load shedding in developing countries. In the strategic version of the problem, the agents wish to minimize their individual costs, and might misreport the position and/or length of their intervals to achieve that. Our goal is to design truthful mechanisms to prevent such strategic misreports and achieve good approximations to the best possible social or egalitarian cost. We consider the fundamental setting of known intervals with equal lengths and provide tight bounds on the approximation ratios achieved by truthful deterministic mechanisms. For the social cost, we also design a randomized truthful mechanism that outperforms all possible deterministic ones. Finally, we highlight a plethora of natural extensions of our model for future work, as well as some natural limitations of those settings.

We study elections where voters are faced with the challenge of expressing preferences over an extreme number of issues under consideration. This is largely motivated by emerging blockchain governance systems, which include voters with different weights and a massive number of community generated proposals. In such scenarios, it is natural to expect that voters will have incomplete preferences, as they may only be able to evaluate or be confident about a very small proportion of the alternatives. As a result, the election outcome may be significantly affected, leading to suboptimal decisions. Our central inquiry revolves around whether delegation of ballots to proxies possessing greater expertise or a more comprehensive understanding of the voters' preferences can lead to outcomes with higher legitimacy and enhanced voters' satisfaction in elections where voters submit incomplete preferences. To explore its aspects, we introduce the following model: potential proxies advertise their ballots over multiple issues, and each voter either delegates to a seemingly attractive proxy or casts a ballot directly. We identify necessary and sufficient conditions that could lead to a socially better outcome by leveraging the participation of proxies. We accompany our theoretical findings with experiments on instances derived from real datasets. Overall, our results enhance the understanding of the power of delegation towards improving election outcomes.

We consider a social choice setting in which agents and alternatives are represented by points in a metric space, and the cost of an agent for an alternative is the distance between the corresponding points in the space. The goal is to choose a single alternative to (approximately) minimize the social cost (cost of all agents) or the maximum cost of any agent, when only limited information about the preferences of the agents is given. Previous work has shown that the best possible distortion one can hope to achieve is $3$ when access to the ordinal preferences of the agents is given, even when the distances between alternatives in the metric space are known. We improve upon this bound of $3$ by designing deterministic mechanisms that exploit a bit of cardinal information. We show that it is possible to achieve distortion $1+\sqrt{2}$ by using the ordinal preferences of the agents, the distances between alternatives, and a threshold approval set per agent that contains all alternatives for whom her cost is within an appropriately chosen factor of her cost for her most-preferred alternative. We show that this bound is the best possible for any deterministic mechanism in general metric spaces, and also provide improved bounds for the fundamental case of a line metric.

We consider a setting with agents that have preferences over alternatives and are partitioned into disjoint districts. The goal is to choose one alternative as the winner using a mechanism which first decides a representative alternative for each district based on a local election with the agents therein as participants, and then chooses one of the district representatives as the winner. Previous work showed bounds on the distortion of a specific class of deterministic plurality-based mechanisms depending on the available information about the preferences of the agents in the districts. In this paper, we first consider the whole class of deterministic mechanisms and show asymptotically tight bounds on their distortion. We then initiate the study of the distortion of randomized mechanisms in distributed voting and show bounds based on several informational assumptions, which in many cases turn out to be tight. Finally, we also experimentally compare the distortion of many different mechanisms of interest using synthetic and real-world data., Comment: Accepted to AAMAS 2023

We study the distributed facility location problem, where a set of agents with positions on the line of real numbers are partitioned into disjoint districts, and the goal is to choose a point to satisfy certain criteria, such as optimize an objective function or avoid strategic behavior. A mechanism in our distributed setting works in two steps: For each district it chooses a point that is representative of the positions reported by the agents in the district, and then decides one of these representative points as the final output. We consider two classes of mechanisms: Unrestricted mechanisms which assume that the agents directly provide their true positions as input, and strategyproof mechanisms which deal with strategic agents and aim to incentivize them to truthfully report their positions. For both classes, we show tight bounds on the best possible approximation in terms of several minimization social objectives, including the well-known social cost (total distance of agents from chosen point) and max cost (maximum distance among all agents from chosen point), as well as other fairness-inspired objectives that are tailor-made for the distributed setting., Comment: Accepted to AAMAS 2023

Allocating resources to individuals in a fair manner has been a topic of interest since ancient times, with most of the early mathematical work on the problem focusing on resources that are infinitely divisible. Over the last decade, there has been a surge of papers studying computational questions regarding the indivisible case, for which exact fairness notions such as envy-freeness and proportionality are hard to satisfy. One main theme in the recent research agenda is to investigate the extent to which their relaxations, like maximin share fairness (MMS) and envy-freeness up to any good (EFX), can be achieved. In this survey, we present a comprehensive review of the recent progress made in the related literature by highlighting different ways to relax fairness notions, common algorithm design techniques, and the most interesting questions for future research., Comment: This survey unifies and extends preliminary versions that appeared in IJCAI 2022 (arXiv:2202.07551) and SIGecom Exchanges (arXiv:2202.08713). It has been accepted for publication to the journal of Artificial Intelligence (AIJ)

In most social choice settings, the participating agents express their preferences over the different alternatives in the form of linear orderings. While this clearly simplifies preference elicitation, it inevitably leads to poor performance with respect to optimizing a cardinal objective, such as the social welfare, since the values of the agents remain virtually unknown. This loss in performance because of lack of information is measured by the notion of distortion. A recent array of works put forward the agenda of designing mechanisms that learn the values of the agents for a small number of alternatives via queries, and use this limited extra information to make better-informed decisions, thus improving distortion. Following this agenda, in this work we focus on a class of combinatorial problems that includes most well-known matching problems and several of their generalizations, such as One-Sided Matching, Two-Sided Matching, General Graph Matching, and $k$-Constrained Resource Allocation. We design two-query mechanisms that achieve the best-possible worst-case distortion in terms of social welfare, and outperform the best-possible expected distortion achieved by randomized ordinal mechanisms., Comment: A conference version of this work was accepted in the 36th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2022)

Allocating resources to individuals in a fair manner has been a topic of interest since the ancient times, with most of the early rigorous mathematical work on the problem focusing on infinitely divisible resources. Recently, there has been a surge of papers studying computational questions regarding various different notions of fairness for the indivisible case, like maximin share fairness (MMS) and envy-freeness up to any good (EFX). We survey the most important results in the discrete fair division literature, focusing on the case of additive valuation functions and paying particular attention to the progress made in the last 10 years.

We introduce a new technique for proving membership of problems in FIXP - the class capturing the complexity of computing a fixed-point of an algebraic circuit. Our technique constructs a "pseudogate" which can be used as a black box when building FIXP circuits. This pseudogate, which we term the "OPT-gate", can solve most convex optimization problems. Using the OPT-gate, we prove new FIXP-membership results, and we generalize and simplify several known results from the literature on fair division, game theory and competitive markets. In particular, we prove complexity results for two classic problems: computing a market equilibrium in the Arrow-Debreu model with general concave utilities is in FIXP, and computing an envy-free division of a cake with very general valuations is FIXP-complete. We further showcase the wide applicability of our technique, by using it to obtain simplified proofs and extensions of known FIXP-membership results for equilibrium computation for various types of strategic games, as well as the pseudomarket mechanism of Hylland and Zeckhauser., Comment: Journal version. Preliminary version appeared at FOCS '21

Fictitious play is a popular learning algorithm in which players that utilize the history of actions played by the players and the knowledge of their own payoff matrix can converge to the Nash equilibrium under certain conditions on the game. We consider the presence of an intelligent player that has access to the entire payoff matrix for the game. We show that by not conforming to fictitious play, such a player can achieve a better payoff than the one at the Nash Equilibrium. This result can be viewed both as a fragility of the fictitious play algorithm to a strategic intelligent player and an indication that players should not throw away additional information they may have, as suggested by classical fictitious play., Comment: 8 pages

We consider a social choice setting with agents that are partitioned into disjoint groups, and have metric preferences over a set of alternatives. Our goal is to choose a single alternative aiming to optimize various objectives that are functions of the distances between agents and alternatives in the metric space, under the constraint that this choice must be made in a distributed way: The preferences of the agents within each group are first aggregated into a representative alternative for the group, and then these group representatives are aggregated into the final winner. Deciding the winner in such a way naturally leads to loss of efficiency, even when complete information about the metric space is available. We provide a series of (mostly tight) bounds on the distortion of distributed mechanisms for variations of well-known objectives, such as the (average) total cost and the maximum cost, and also for new objectives that are particularly appropriate for this distributed setting and have not been studied before.

Traditional competitive markets do not account for negative externalities; indirect costs that some participants impose on others, such as the cost of over-appropriating a common-pool resource (which diminishes future stock, and thus harvest, for everyone). Quantifying appropriate interventions to market prices has proven to be quite challenging. We propose a practical approach to computing market prices and allocations via a deep reinforcement learning policymaker agent, operating in an environment of other learning agents. Our policymaker allows us to tune the prices with regard to diverse objectives such as sustainability and resource wastefulness, fairness, buyers' and sellers' welfare, etc. As a highlight of our findings, our policymaker is significantly more successful in maintaining resource sustainability, compared to the market equilibrium outcome, in scarce resource environments., Comment: Accepted to the 22nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2023)

The study of approximate mechanism design for facility location problems has been in the center of research at the intersection of artificial intelligence and economics for the last decades, largely due to its practical importance in various domains, such as social planning and clustering. At a high level, the goal is to design mechanisms to select a set of locations on which to build a set of facilities, aiming to optimize some social objective and ensure desirable properties based on the preferences of strategic agents, who might have incentives to misreport their private information such as their locations. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of the significant progress that has been made since the introduction of the problem, highlighting the different variants and methodologies, as well as the most interesting directions for future research., Comment: To appear in IJCAI 2021 (Survey Track)

We initiate the study of the heterogeneous facility location problem with limited resources. We mainly focus on the fundamental case where a set of agents are positioned in the line segment [0,1] and have approval preferences over two available facilities. A mechanism takes as input the positions and the preferences of the agents, and chooses to locate a single facility based on this information. We study mechanisms that aim to maximize the social welfare (the total utility the agents derive from facilities they approve), under the constraint of incentivizing the agents to truthfully report their positions and preferences. We consider three different settings depending on the level of agent-related information that is public or private. For each setting, we design deterministic and randomized strategyproof mechanisms that achieve a good approximation of the optimal social welfare, and complement these with nearly-tight impossibility results.

We consider the problem of computing a (pure) Bayes-Nash equilibrium in the first-price auction with continuous value distributions and discrete bidding space. We prove that when bidders have independent subjective prior beliefs about the value distributions of the other bidders, computing an $\varepsilon$-equilibrium of the auction is PPAD-complete, and computing an exact equilibrium is FIXP-complete. We also provide an efficient algorithm for solving a special case of the problem, for a fixed number of bidders and available bids., Comment: Journal version. Preliminary version appeared at EC '21

The notion of distortion in social choice problems has been defined to measure the loss in efficiency -- typically measured by the utilitarian social welfare, the sum of utilities of the participating agents -- due to having access only to limited information about the preferences of the agents. We survey the most significant results of the literature on distortion from the past 15 years, and highlight important open problems and the most promising avenues of ongoing and future work., Comment: Survey

We consider the one-sided matching problem, where n agents have preferences over n items, and these preferences are induced by underlying cardinal valuation functions. The goal is to match every agent to a single item so as to maximize the social welfare. Most of the related literature, however, assumes that the values of the agents are not a priori known, and only access to the ordinal preferences of the agents over the items is provided. Consequently, this incomplete information leads to loss of efficiency, which is measured by the notion of distortion. In this paper, we further assume that the agents can answer a small number of queries, allowing us partial access to their values. We study the interplay between elicited cardinal information (measured by the number of queries per agent) and distortion for one-sided matching, as well as a wide range of well-studied related problems. Qualitatively, our results show that with a limited number of queries, it is possible to obtain significant improvements over the classic setting, where only access to ordinal information is given.

We consider the $\varepsilon$-Consensus-Halving problem, in which a set of heterogeneous agents aim at dividing a continuous resource into two (not necessarily contiguous) portions that all of them simultaneously consider to be of approximately the same value (up to $\varepsilon$). This problem was recently shown to be PPA-complete, for $n$ agents and $n$ cuts, even for very simple valuation functions. In a quest to understand the root of the complexity of the problem, we consider the setting where there is only a constant number of agents, and we consider both the computational complexity and the query complexity of the problem. For agents with monotone valuation functions, we show a dichotomy: for two agents the problem is polynomial-time solvable, whereas for three or more agents it becomes PPA-complete. Similarly, we show that for two monotone agents the problem can be solved with polynomially-many queries, whereas for three or more agents, we provide exponential query complexity lower bounds. These results are enabled via an interesting connection to a monotone Borsuk-Ulam problem, which may be of independent interest. For agents with general valuations, we show that the problem is PPA-complete and admits exponential query complexity lower bounds, even for two agents., Comment: Journal version

We consider a single-facility location problem, where agents are positioned on the real line and are partitioned into multiple disjoint districts. The goal is to choose a location (where a public facility is to be built) so as to minimize the total distance of the agents from it. This process is distributed: the positions of the agents in each district are first aggregated into a representative location for the district, and then one of the district representatives is chosen as the facility location. This indirect access to the positions of the agents inevitably leads to inefficiency, which is captured by the notion of distortion. We study the discrete version of the problem, where the set of alternative locations is finite, as well as the continuous one, where every point of the line is an alternative, and paint an almost complete picture of the distortion landscape of both general and strategyproof distributed mechanisms.

In the $\varepsilon$-Consensus-Halving problem, a fundamental problem in fair division, there are $n$ agents with valuations over the interval $[0,1]$, and the goal is to divide the interval into pieces and assign a label "$+$" or "$-$" to each piece, such that every agent values the total amount of "$+$" and the total amount of "$-$" almost equally. The problem was recently proven by Filos-Ratsikas and Goldberg [2019] to be the first "natural" complete problem for the computational class PPA, answering a decade-old open question. In this paper, we examine the extent to which the problem becomes easy to solve, if one restricts the class of valuation functions. To this end, we provide the following contributions. First, we obtain a strengthening of the PPA-hardness result of [Filos-Ratsikas and Goldberg, 2019], to the case when agents have piecewise uniform valuations with only two blocks. We obtain this result via a new reduction, which is in fact conceptually much simpler than the corresponding one in [Filos-Ratsikas and Goldberg, 2019]. Then, we consider the case of single-block (uniform) valuations and provide a parameterized polynomial time algorithm for solving $\varepsilon$-Consensus-Halving for any $\varepsilon$, as well as a polynomial-time algorithm for $\varepsilon=1/2$. Finally, an important application of our new techniques is the first hardness result for a generalization of Consensus-Halving, the Consensus-$1/k$-Division problem [Simmons and Su, 2003]. In particular, we prove that $\varepsilon$-Consensus-$1/3$-Division is PPAD-hard., Comment: Journal version. Preliminary version appeared at EC '20

We consider the classic problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods among agents with additive valuation functions and explore the connection between two prominent fairness notions: maximum Nash welfare (MNW) and envy-freeness up to any good (EFX). We establish that an MNW allocation is always EFX as long as there are at most two possible values for the goods, whereas this implication is no longer true for three or more distinct values. As a notable consequence, this proves the existence of EFX allocations for these restricted valuation functions. While the efficient computation of an MNW allocation for two possible values remains an open problem, we present a novel algorithm for directly constructing EFX allocations in this setting. Finally, we study the question of whether an MNW allocation implies any EFX guarantee for general additive valuation functions under a natural new interpretation of approximate EFX allocations.

Blockchain based systems allow various kinds of financial transactions to be executed in a decentralized manner. However, these systems often rely on a trusted third party (oracle) to get correct information about the real-world events, which trigger the financial transactions. In this paper, we identify two biggest challenges in building decentralized, trustless and transparent oracles. The first challenge is acquiring correct information about the real-world events without relying on a trusted information provider. We show how a peer-consistency incentive mechanism can be used to acquire truthful information from an untrusted and self-interested crowd, even when the crowd has outside incentives to provide wrong information. The second is a system design and implementation challenge. For the first time, we show how to implement a trustless and transparent oracle in Ethereum. We discuss various non-trivial issues that arise in implementing peer-consistency mechanisms in Ethereum, suggest several optimizations to reduce gas cost and provide empirical analysis.

Aggregating the preferences of individuals into a collective decision is the core subject of study of social choice theory. In 2006, Procaccia and Rosenschein considered a utilitarian social choice setting, where the agents have explicit numerical values for the alternatives, yet they only report their linear orderings over them. To compare different aggregation mechanisms, Procaccia and Rosenschein introduced the notion of distortion, which quantifies the inefficiency of using only ordinal information when trying to maximize the social welfare, i.e., the sum of the underlying values of the agents for the chosen outcome. Since then, this research area has flourished and bounds on the distortion have been obtained for a wide variety of fundamental scenarios. However, the vast majority of the existing literature is focused on the case where nothing is known beyond the ordinal preferences of the agents over the alternatives. In this paper, we take a more expressive approach, and consider mechanisms that are allowed to further ask a few cardinal queries in order to gain partial access to the underlying values that the agents have for the alternatives. With this extra power, we design new deterministic mechanisms that achieve significantly improved distortion bounds and, in many cases, outperform the best-known randomized ordinal mechanisms. We paint an almost complete picture of the number of queries required by deterministic mechanisms to achieve specific distortion bounds.

Voting can abstractly model any decision-making scenario and as such it has been extensively studied over the decades. Recently, the related literature has focused on quantifying the impact of utilizing only limited information in the voting process on the societal welfare for the outcome, by bounding the distortion of voting rules. Even though there has been significant progress towards this goal, all previous works have so far neglected the fact that in many scenarios (like presidential elections) voting is actually a distributed procedure. In this paper, we consider a setting in which the voters are partitioned into disjoint districts and vote locally therein to elect local winning alternatives using a voting rule; the final outcome is then chosen from the set of these alternatives. We prove tight bounds on the distortion of well-known voting rules for such distributed elections both from a worst-case perspective as well as from a best-case one. Our results indicate that the partition of voters into districts leads to considerably higher distortion, a phenomenon which we also experimentally showcase using real-world data.

We study a generalization of the classical stable matching problem that allows for cardinal preferences (as opposed to ordinal) and fractional matchings (as opposed to integral). After observing that, in this cardinal setting, stable fractional matchings can have much higher social welfare than stable integral ones, our goal is to understand the computational complexity of finding an optimal (i.e., welfare-maximizing) or nearly-optimal stable fractional matching. We present simple approximation algorithms for this problem with weak welfare guarantees and, rather unexpectedly, we furthermore show that achieving better approximations is hard. This computational hardness persists even for approximate stability. To the best of our knowledge, these are the first computational complexity results for stable fractional matchings. En route to these results, we provide a number of structural observations., Comment: Accepted to Artificial Intelligence (AIJ)

We study the trade-off between the Price of Anarchy (PoA) and the Price of Stability (PoS) in mechanism design, in the prototypical problem of unrelated machine scheduling. We give bounds on the space of feasible mechanisms with respect to the above metrics, and observe that two fundamental mechanisms, namely the First-Price (FP) and the Second-Price (SP), lie on the two opposite extrema of this boundary. Furthermore, for the natural class of anonymous task-independent mechanisms, we completely characterize the PoA/PoS Pareto frontier; we design a class of optimal mechanisms $\mathcal{SP}_\alpha$ that lie exactly on this frontier. In particular, these mechanisms range smoothly, with respect to parameter $\alpha\geq 1$ across the frontier, between the First-Price ($\mathcal{SP}_1$) and Second-Price ($\mathcal{SP}_\infty$) mechanisms. En route to these results, we also provide a definitive answer to an important question related to the scheduling problem, namely whether non-truthful mechanisms can provide better makespan guarantees in the equilibrium, compared to truthful ones. We answer this question in the negative, by proving that the Price of Anarchy of all scheduling mechanisms is at least $n$, where $n$ is the number of machines., Comment: To be published in Mathematics of Operations Research

We resolve the computational complexity of two problems known as NECKLACE-SPLITTING and DISCRETE HAM SANDWICH, showing that they are PPA-complete. For NECKLACE SPLITTING, this result is specific to the important special case in which two thieves share the necklace. We do this via a PPA-completeness result for an approximate version of the CONSENSUS-HALVING problem, strengthening our recent result that the problem is PPA-complete for inverse-exponential precision. At the heart of our construction is a smooth embedding of the high-dimensional M\"obius strip in the CONSENSUS-HALVING problem. These results settle the status of PPA as a class that captures the complexity of "natural" problems whose definitions do not incorporate a circuit., Comment: 58 pages, 20 figures

When a company undergoes a merger or transfers its ownership, the existing governing body has an opinion on which buyer should take over as the new owner. Similar situations occur while assigning the host of big sports tournaments, like the World Cup or the Olympics. In all these settings, the values of the external bidders are as important as the opinions of the internal experts. Motivated by such scenarios, we consider a social welfare maximizing approach to design and analyze truthful mechanisms in {\em hybrid social choice} settings, where payments can be imposed to the bidders, but not to the experts. Since this problem is a combination of mechanism design with and without monetary transfers, classical solutions like VCG cannot be applied, making this a novel mechanism design problem. We consider the simple but fundamental scenario with one expert and two bidders, and provide tight approximation guarantees of the optimal social welfare. We distinguish between mechanisms that use ordinal and cardinal information, as well as between mechanisms that base their decisions on one of the two sides (either the bidders or the expert) or both. Our analysis shows that the cardinal setting is quite rich and admits several non-trivial randomized truthful mechanisms, and also allows for closer-to-optimal welfare guarantees.

In a multi-unit market, a seller brings multiple units of a good and tries to sell them to a set of buyers that have monetary endowments. While a Walrasian equilibrium does not always exist in this model, natural relaxations of the concept that retain its desirable fairness properties do exist. We study the dynamics of (Walrasian) envy-free pricing mechanisms in this environment, showing that for any such pricing mechanism, the best response dynamic starting from truth-telling converges to a pure Nash equilibrium with small loss in revenue and welfare. Moreover, we generalize these bounds to capture all the Nash equilibria for a large class of (monotone) pricing mechanisms. We also identify a natural mechanism, which selects the minimum Walrasian envy-free price, in which for $n=2$ buyers the best response dynamic converges from any starting profile, and for which we conjecture convergence for any number of buyers.

We show that the computational problem CONSENSUS-HALVING is PPA-complete, the first PPA-completeness result for a problem whose definition does not involve an explicit circuit. We also show that an approximate version of this problem is polynomial-time equivalent to NECKLACE SPLITTING, which establishes PPAD-hardness for NECKLACE SPLITTING, and suggests that it is also PPA-complete.

We study the consensus-halving problem of dividing an object into two portions, such that each of $n$ agents has equal valuation for the two portions. The $\epsilon$-approximate consensus-halving problem allows each agent to have an $\epsilon$ discrepancy on the values of the portions. We prove that computing $\epsilon$-approximate consensus-halving solution using $n$ cuts is in PPA, and is PPAD-hard, where $\epsilon$ is some positive constant; the problem remains PPAD-hard when we allow a constant number of additional cuts. It is NP-hard to decide whether a solution with $n-1$ cuts exists for the problem. As a corollary of our results, we obtain that the approximate computational version of the Continuous Necklace Splitting Problem is PPAD-hard when the number of portions $t$ is two., Comment: Published in MFCS 2018

Motivated by the massive deployment of power-hungry data centers for service provisioning, we examine the problem of routing in optical networks with the aim of minimizing traffic-driven power consumption. To tackle this issue, routing must take into account energy efficiency as well as capacity considerations; moreover, in rapidly-varying network environments, this must be accomplished in a real-time, distributed manner that remains robust in the presence of random disturbances and noise. In view of this, we derive a pricing scheme whose Nash equilibria coincide with the network's socially optimum states, and we propose a distributed learning method based on the Boltzmann distribution of statistical mechanics. Using tools from stochastic calculus, we show that the resulting Boltzmann routing scheme exhibits remarkable convergence properties under uncertainty: specifically, the long-term average of the network's power consumption converges within $\varepsilon$ of its minimum value in time which is at most $\tilde O(1/\varepsilon^2)$, irrespective of the fluctuations' magnitude; additionally, if the network admits a strict, non-mixing optimum state, the algorithm converges to it - again, no matter the noise level. Our analysis is supplemented by extensive numerical simulations which show that Boltzmann routing can lead to a significant decrease in power consumption over basic, shortest-path routing schemes in realistic network conditions., Comment: 24 pages, 4 figures

Multi-unit auctions are a paradigmatic model, where a seller brings multiple units of a good, while several buyers bring monetary endowments. It is well known that Walrasian equilibria do not always exist in this model, however compelling relaxations such as (Walrasian) envy-free pricing do. In this paper we design an optimal envy-free mechanism for multi-unit auctions with budgets. When the market is even mildly competitive, the approximation ratios of this mechanism are small constants for both the revenue and welfare objectives, and in fact for welfare the approximation converges to 1 as the market becomes fully competitive. We also give an impossibility theorem, showing that truthfulness requires discarding resources and, in particular, is incompatible with (Pareto) efficiency., Comment: 32 pages, full version of MFCS 2017 paper (the previous title was "Envy-free pricing in multi-unit markets")

We study the truthful facility assignment problem, where a set of agents with private most-preferred points on a metric space are assigned to facilities that lie on the metric space, under capacity constraints on the facilities. The goal is to produce such an assignment that minimizes the social cost, i.e., the total distance between the most-preferred points of the agents and their corresponding facilities in the assignment, under the constraint of truthfulness, which ensures that agents do not misreport their most-preferred points. We propose a resource augmentation framework, where a truthful mechanism is evaluated by its worst-case performance on an instance with enhanced facility capacities against the optimal mechanism on the same instance with the original capacities. We study a very well-known mechanism, Serial Dictatorship, and provide an exact analysis of its performance. Although Serial Dictatorship is a purely combinatorial mechanism, our analysis uses linear programming; a linear program expresses its greedy nature as well as the structure of the input, and finds the input instance that enforces the mechanism have its worst-case performance. Bounding the objective of the linear program using duality arguments allows us to compute tight bounds on the approximation ratio. Among other results, we prove that Serial Dictatorship has approximation ratio $g/(g-2)$ when the capacities are multiplied by any integer $g \geq 3$. Our results suggest that even a limited augmentation of the resources can have wondrous effects on the performance of the mechanism and in particular, the approximation ratio goes to 1 as the augmentation factor becomes large. We complement our results with bounds on the approximation ratio of Random Serial Dictatorship, the randomized version of Serial Dictatorship, when there is no resource augmentation.

We consider the egalitarian welfare aspects of random assignment mechanisms when agents have unrestricted cardinal utilities over the objects. We give bounds on how well different random assignment mechanisms approximate the optimal egalitarian value and investigate the effect that different well-known properties like ordinality, envy-freeness, and truthfulness have on the achievable egalitarian value. Finally, we conduct detailed experiments analyzing the tradeoffs between efficiency with envy-freeness or truthfulness using two prominent random assignment mechanisms --- random serial dictatorship and the probabilistic serial mechanism --- for different classes of utility functions and distributions.

The Adjusted Winner procedure is an important fair division mechanism proposed by Brams and Taylor for allocating goods between two parties. It has been used in practice for divorce settlements and analyzing political disputes. Assuming truthful declaration of the valuations, it computes an allocation that is envy-free, equitable and Pareto optimal. We show that Adjusted Winner admits several elegant characterizations, which further shed light on the outcomes reached with strategic agents. We find that the procedure may not admit pure Nash equilibria in either the discrete or continuous variants, but is guaranteed to have $\epsilon$-Nash equilibria for each $\epsilon$ > 0. Moreover, under informed tie-breaking, exact pure Nash equilibria always exist, are Pareto optimal, and their social welfare is at least 3/4 of the optimal.

We study the problem of locating a single facility on a real line based on the reports of self-interested agents, when agents have double-peaked preferences, with the peaks being on opposite sides of their locations. We observe that double-peaked preferences capture real-life scenarios and thus complement the well-studied notion of single-peaked preferences. We mainly focus on the case where peaks are equidistant from the agents' locations and discuss how our results extend to more general settings. We show that most of the results for single-peaked preferences do not directly apply to this setting; this makes the problem essentially more challenging. As our main contribution, we present a simple truthful-in-expectation mechanism that achieves an approximation ratio of 1+b/c for both the social and the maximum cost, where b is the distance of the agent from the peak and c is the minimum cost of an agent. For the latter case, we provide a 3/2 lower bound on the approximation ratio of any truthful-in-expectation mechanism. We also study deterministic mechanisms under some natural conditions, proving lower bounds and approximation guarantees. We prove that among a large class of reasonable mechanisms, there is no deterministic mechanism that outperforms our truthful-in-expectation mechanism.

We study the Price of Anarchy of mechanisms for the well-known problem of one-sided matching, or house allocation, with respect to the social welfare objective. We consider both ordinal mechanisms, where agents submit preference lists over the items, and cardinal mechanisms, where agents may submit numerical values for the items being allocated. We present a general lower bound of $\Omega(\sqrt{n})$ on the Price of Anarchy, which applies to all mechanisms. We show that two well-known mechanisms, Probabilistic Serial, and Random Priority, achieve a matching upper bound. We extend our lower bound to the Price of Stability of a large class of mechanisms that satisfy a common proportionality property, and show stronger bounds on the Price of Anarchy of all deterministic mechanisms.

Cognitive radio (CR) systems allow opportunistic, secondary users (SUs) to access portions of the spectrum that are unused by the network's licensed primary users (PUs), provided that the induced interference does not compromise the primary users' performance guarantees. To account for interference constraints of this type, we consider a flexible spectrum access pricing scheme that charges secondary users based on the interference that they cause to the system's primary users (individually, globally, or both), and we examine how secondary users can maximize their achievable transmission rate in this setting. We show that the resulting non-cooperative game admits a unique Nash equilibrium under very mild assumptions on the pricing mechanism employed by the network operator, and under both static and ergodic (fast-fading) channel conditions. In addition, we derive a dynamic power allocation policy that converges to equilibrium within a few iterations (even for large numbers of users), and which relies only on local signal-to-interference-and-noise measurements; importantly, the proposed algorithm retains its convergence properties even in the ergodic channel regime, despite the inherent stochasticity thereof. Our theoretical analysis is complemented by extensive numerical simulations which illustrate the performance and scalability properties of the proposed pricing scheme under realistic network conditions., Comment: 24 pages, 9 figures

We study the problem of approximate social welfare maximization (without money) in one-sided matching problems when agents have unrestricted cardinal preferences over a finite set of items. Random priority is a very well-known truthful-in-expectation mechanism for the problem. We prove that the approximation ratio of random priority is Theta(n^{-1/2}) while no truthful-in-expectation mechanism can achieve an approximation ratio better than O(n^{-1/2}), where n is the number of agents and items. Furthermore, we prove that the approximation ratio of all ordinal (not necessarily truthful-in-expectation) mechanisms is upper bounded by O(n^{-1/2}), indicating that random priority is asymptotically the best truthful-in-expectation mechanism and the best ordinal mechanism for the problem., Comment: 13 pages

We consider the fundamental mechanism design problem of approximate social welfare maximization under general cardinal preferences on a finite number of alternatives and without money. The well-known range voting scheme can be thought of as a non-truthful mechanism for exact social welfare maximization in this setting. With m being the number of alternatives, we exhibit a randomized truthful-in-expectation ordinal mechanism implementing an outcome whose expected social welfare is at least an Omega(m^{-3/4}) fraction of the social welfare of the socially optimal alternative. On the other hand, we show that for sufficiently many agents and any truthful-in-expectation ordinal mechanism, there is a valuation profile where the mechanism achieves at most an O(m^{-{2/3}) fraction of the optimal social welfare in expectation. We get tighter bounds for the natural special case of m = 3, and in that case furthermore obtain separation results concerning the approximation ratios achievable by natural restricted classes of truthful-in-expectation mechanisms. In particular, we show that for m = 3 and a sufficiently large number of agents, the best mechanism that is ordinal as well as mixed-unilateral has an approximation ratio between 0.610 and 0.611, the best ordinal mechanism has an approximation ratio between 0.616 and 0.641, while the best mixed-unilateral mechanism has an approximation ratio bigger than 0.660. In particular, the best mixed-unilateral non-ordinal (i.e., cardinal) mechanism strictly outperforms all ordinal ones, even the non-mixed-unilateral ordinal ones.

We analyze the problem of distributed power allocation for orthogonal multiple access channels by considering a continuous non-cooperative game whose strategy space represents the users' distribution of transmission power over the network's channels. When the channels are static, we find that this game admits an exact potential function and this allows us to show that it has a unique equilibrium almost surely. Furthermore, using the game's potential property, we derive a modified version of the replicator dynamics of evolutionary game theory which applies to this continuous game, and we show that if the network's users employ a distributed learning scheme based on these dynamics, then they converge to equilibrium exponentially quickly. On the other hand, a major challenge occurs if the channels do not remain static but fluctuate stochastically over time, following a stationary ergodic process. In that case, the associated ergodic game still admits a unique equilibrium, but the learning analysis becomes much more complicated because the replicator dynamics are no longer deterministic. Nonetheless, by employing results from the theory of stochastic approximation, we show that users still converge to the game's unique equilibrium. Our analysis hinges on a game-theoretical result which is of independent interest: in finite player games which admit a (possibly nonlinear) convex potential function, the replicator dynamics (suitably modified to account for nonlinear payoffs) converge to an eps-neighborhood of an equilibrium at time of order O(log(1/eps))., Comment: 11 pages, 8 figures. Revised manuscript structure and added more material and figures for the case of stochastically fluctuating channels. This version will appear in the IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communication, Special Issue on Game Theory in Wireless Communications

We analyze the distributed power allocation problem in parallel multiple access channels (MAC) by studying an associated non-cooperative game which admits an exact potential. Even though games of this type have been the subject of considerable study in the literature, we find that the sufficient conditions which ensure uniqueness of Nash equilibrium points typically do not hold in this context. Nonetheless, we show that the parallel MAC game admits a unique equilibrium almost surely, thus establishing an important class of counterexamples where these sufficient conditions are not necessary. Furthermore, if the network's users employ a distributed learning scheme based on the replicator dynamics, we show that they converge to equilibrium from almost any initial condition, even though users only have local information at their disposal., Comment: 18 pages, 4 figures, submitted to Valuetools '11

We study the distribution of traffic in networks whose users try to minimise their delays by adhering to a simple learning scheme inspired by the replicator dynamics of evolutionary game theory. The stable steady states of these dynamics coincide with the network's Wardrop equilibria and form a convex polytope whose dimension is determined by the network's redundancy (an important concept which measures the "linear dependence" of the users' paths). Despite this abundance of stationary points, the long-term behaviour of the replicator dynamics turns out to be remarkably simple: every solution orbit converges to a Wardrop equilibrium. On the other hand, a major challenge occurs when the users' delays fluctuate unpredictably due to random external factors. In that case, interior equilibria are no longer stationary, but strict equilibria remain stochastically stable irrespective of the fluctuations' magnitude. In fact, if the network has no redundancy and the users are patient enough, we show that the long-term averages of the users' traffic flows converge to the vicinity of an equilibrium, and we also estimate the corresponding invariant measure., Comment: 39 pages, 4 figures. Incorporated material on nonatomic potential games and Braess's paradox; some minor typos have now been corrected

We study repeated games where players use an exponential learning scheme in order to adapt to an ever-changing environment. If the game's payoffs are subject to random perturbations, this scheme leads to a new stochastic version of the replicator dynamics that is quite different from the "aggregate shocks" approach of evolutionary game theory. Irrespective of the perturbations' magnitude, we find that strategies which are dominated (even iteratively) eventually become extinct and that the game's strict Nash equilibria are stochastically asymptotically stable. We complement our analysis by illustrating these results in the case of congestion games., Comment: Published in at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/09-AAP651 the Annals of Applied Probability (http://www.imstat.org/aap/) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org)

We investigate the behavior of a large number of selfish users that are able to switch dynamically between multiple wireless access-points (possibly belonging to different standards) by introducing an iterated non-cooperative game. Users start out completely uneducated and naive but, by using a fixed set of strategies to process a broadcasted training signal, they quickly evolve and converge to an evolutionarily stable equilibrium. Then, in order to measure efficiency in this steady state, we adapt the notion of the price of anarchy to our setting and we obtain an explicit analytic estimate for it by using methods from statistical physics (namely the theory of replicas). Surprisingly, we find that the price of anarchy does not depend on the specifics of the wireless nodes (e.g. spectral efficiency) but only on the number of strategies per user and a particular combination of the number of nodes, the number of users and the size of the training signal. Finally, we map this game to the well-studied minority game, generalizing its analysis to an arbitrary number of choices., Comment: 10 pages, 5 figures; to appear in the IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communication, Special Issue on Game Theory in Communication Systems, 2008