非凸性市场的线性定价机制

Paul R. Milgrom, Mitchell Watt
{"title":"非凸性市场的线性定价机制","authors":"Paul R. Milgrom, Mitchell Watt","doi":"10.1145/3490486.3538310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We introduce two linear pricing mechanisms for quasilinear economies in which market-clearing prices may not exist. Electricity markets, fisheries markets, and many others include producers with start-up costs, ramping costs, or other fixed costs that fail the convexity assumptions traditionally used to prove that clearing prices exist. Each mechanism relaxes a condition of Walrasian equilibrium. While the Walrasian mechanism determines payments among buyers and sellers using a single price vector, our markup mechanism allows one more parameter -- a multiplier -- that marks up the prices paid by buyers above those paid to sellers. These markups allow the mechanism to avoid budget deficits even when non-convexities lead to failures of market-clearing. And while the Walrasian mechanism assigns each producer its preferred production plan, our rationing mechanism carefully rations some buyers. Both mechanisms always produce feasible allocations, avoid budget deficits, and are computationally tractable. The proportion of efficient surplus lost in the markup mechanism is O(1/N), where N is the number of buyers and sellers. When agents on the buyer side have convex preferences and strongly monotone demand, the rationing mechanism suffers a smaller welfare loss, namely O(1/N2-ε) for all ε>0. Importantly, both mechanisms have good large-market incentive properties similar to those of the Walrasian mechanism. Key to our construction of these mechanisms and of some independent interest is our new Bound-Form First Welfare Theorem for quasilinear economies, which gives an upper bound on the deadweight loss of any feasible allocation ω in terms of any positive price vector p. It asserts that the welfare loss is bounded above by B+R, where B is the budget deficit from ω at prices p, which is non-zero when supply strictly exceeds demand, and R is the sum of the rationing losses suffered by each individual agent n when its allocated bundle ωn is different from its preferred bundle at price vector p. The Bound Form First Welfare Theorem takes its name from its implication that the welfare loss is zero when (p,ω) is a competitive equilibrium. The full paper is available at https://mitchwatt.github.io/files/PricingMechanismsNonConvex.pdf.","PeriodicalId":209859,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 23rd ACM Conference on Economics and Computation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Linear Pricing Mechanisms for Markets without Convexity\",\"authors\":\"Paul R. Milgrom, Mitchell Watt\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3490486.3538310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We introduce two linear pricing mechanisms for quasilinear economies in which market-clearing prices may not exist. Electricity markets, fisheries markets, and many others include producers with start-up costs, ramping costs, or other fixed costs that fail the convexity assumptions traditionally used to prove that clearing prices exist. Each mechanism relaxes a condition of Walrasian equilibrium. While the Walrasian mechanism determines payments among buyers and sellers using a single price vector, our markup mechanism allows one more parameter -- a multiplier -- that marks up the prices paid by buyers above those paid to sellers. These markups allow the mechanism to avoid budget deficits even when non-convexities lead to failures of market-clearing. And while the Walrasian mechanism assigns each producer its preferred production plan, our rationing mechanism carefully rations some buyers. Both mechanisms always produce feasible allocations, avoid budget deficits, and are computationally tractable. The proportion of efficient surplus lost in the markup mechanism is O(1/N), where N is the number of buyers and sellers. When agents on the buyer side have convex preferences and strongly monotone demand, the rationing mechanism suffers a smaller welfare loss, namely O(1/N2-ε) for all ε>0. Importantly, both mechanisms have good large-market incentive properties similar to those of the Walrasian mechanism. Key to our construction of these mechanisms and of some independent interest is our new Bound-Form First Welfare Theorem for quasilinear economies, which gives an upper bound on the deadweight loss of any feasible allocation ω in terms of any positive price vector p. It asserts that the welfare loss is bounded above by B+R, where B is the budget deficit from ω at prices p, which is non-zero when supply strictly exceeds demand, and R is the sum of the rationing losses suffered by each individual agent n when its allocated bundle ωn is different from its preferred bundle at price vector p. The Bound Form First Welfare Theorem takes its name from its implication that the welfare loss is zero when (p,ω) is a competitive equilibrium. The full paper is available at https://mitchwatt.github.io/files/PricingMechanismsNonConvex.pdf.\",\"PeriodicalId\":209859,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 23rd ACM Conference on Economics and Computation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 23rd ACM Conference on Economics and Computation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3490486.3538310\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 23rd ACM Conference on Economics and Computation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3490486.3538310","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们为准线性经济引入了两种线性定价机制,其中市场出清价格可能不存在。电力市场、渔业市场和许多其他市场都包括有启动成本、上升成本或其他固定成本的生产商,这些固定成本不符合传统上用来证明清算价格存在的凸性假设。每种机制都满足瓦尔拉斯平衡的一个条件。瓦尔拉斯机制使用单一的价格向量来决定买家和卖家之间的支付,而我们的加价机制允许更多的参数——乘数——来标记买家支付的价格高于卖家支付的价格。即使在非凸性导致市场出清失败的情况下,这种加价机制也能避免预算赤字。瓦尔拉斯机制为每个生产者分配了自己喜欢的生产计划,而我们的配给机制则小心翼翼地配给一些买家。这两种机制总是产生可行的分配,避免预算赤字,并且在计算上易于处理。在加价机制下,有效剩余损失的比例为0 (1/N),其中N为买卖双方的数量。当买方代理具有凸偏好和强单调需求时,配给制机制的福利损失较小,即对于所有ε>0的代理,福利损失为O(1/N2-ε)。重要的是,这两种机制都具有类似于瓦尔拉斯机制的良好的大市场激励特性。我们构建这些机制和一些独立兴趣的关键是我们的准线性经济的新有界形式第一福利定理,它给出了任何可行分配ω在任何正价格向量p方面的死重损失的上界。它断言福利损失的上界是B+R,其中B是ω在价格p下的预算赤字,当供给严格超过需求时,它是非零的。R是在价格向量p上,当分配的包ωn不同于其偏好的包ω时,每个个体代理n所遭受的配给损失的总和。束缚形式第一福利定理因其隐含的含义而得名,即当(p,ω)是竞争均衡时,福利损失为零。全文可在https://mitchwatt.github.io/files/PricingMechanismsNonConvex.pdf上找到。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Linear Pricing Mechanisms for Markets without Convexity
We introduce two linear pricing mechanisms for quasilinear economies in which market-clearing prices may not exist. Electricity markets, fisheries markets, and many others include producers with start-up costs, ramping costs, or other fixed costs that fail the convexity assumptions traditionally used to prove that clearing prices exist. Each mechanism relaxes a condition of Walrasian equilibrium. While the Walrasian mechanism determines payments among buyers and sellers using a single price vector, our markup mechanism allows one more parameter -- a multiplier -- that marks up the prices paid by buyers above those paid to sellers. These markups allow the mechanism to avoid budget deficits even when non-convexities lead to failures of market-clearing. And while the Walrasian mechanism assigns each producer its preferred production plan, our rationing mechanism carefully rations some buyers. Both mechanisms always produce feasible allocations, avoid budget deficits, and are computationally tractable. The proportion of efficient surplus lost in the markup mechanism is O(1/N), where N is the number of buyers and sellers. When agents on the buyer side have convex preferences and strongly monotone demand, the rationing mechanism suffers a smaller welfare loss, namely O(1/N2-ε) for all ε>0. Importantly, both mechanisms have good large-market incentive properties similar to those of the Walrasian mechanism. Key to our construction of these mechanisms and of some independent interest is our new Bound-Form First Welfare Theorem for quasilinear economies, which gives an upper bound on the deadweight loss of any feasible allocation ω in terms of any positive price vector p. It asserts that the welfare loss is bounded above by B+R, where B is the budget deficit from ω at prices p, which is non-zero when supply strictly exceeds demand, and R is the sum of the rationing losses suffered by each individual agent n when its allocated bundle ωn is different from its preferred bundle at price vector p. The Bound Form First Welfare Theorem takes its name from its implication that the welfare loss is zero when (p,ω) is a competitive equilibrium. The full paper is available at https://mitchwatt.github.io/files/PricingMechanismsNonConvex.pdf.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
On Two-sided Matching in Infinite Markets Herd Design Efficient Capacity Provisioning for Firms with Multiple Locations: The Case of the Public Cloud Tight Incentive Analysis on Sybil Attacks to Market Equilibrium of Resource Exchange over General Networks General Graphs are Easier than Bipartite Graphs: Tight Bounds for Secretary Matching
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1