真实且几乎不受嫉妒影响的不可分割物品分配机制:随机性的力量

Xiaolin Bu, Biaoshuai Tao
{"title":"真实且几乎不受嫉妒影响的不可分割物品分配机制:随机性的力量","authors":"Xiaolin Bu, Biaoshuai Tao","doi":"arxiv-2407.13634","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We study the problem of fairly and truthfully allocating $m$ indivisible\nitems to $n$ agents with additive preferences. Specifically, we consider\ntruthful mechanisms outputting allocations that satisfy EF$^{+u}_{-v}$, where,\nin an EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ allocation, for any pair of agents $i$ and $j$, agent $i$\nwill not envy agent $j$ if $u$ items were added to $i$'s bundle and $v$ items\nwere removed from $j$'s bundle. Previous work easily indicates that, when\nrestricted to deterministic mechanisms, truthfulness will lead to a poor\nguarantee of fairness: even with two agents, for any $u$ and $v$,\nEF$^{+u}_{-v}$ cannot be guaranteed by truthful mechanisms when the number of\nitems is large enough. In this work, we focus on randomized mechanisms, where\nwe consider ex-ante truthfulness and ex-post fairness. For two agents, we\npresent a truthful mechanism that achieves EF$^{+0}_{-1}$ (i.e., the\nwell-studied fairness notion EF$1$). For three agents, we present a truthful\nmechanism that achieves EF$^{+1}_{-1}$. For $n$ agents in general, we show that\nthere exist truthful mechanisms that achieve EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ for some $u$ and\n$v$ that depend only on $n$ (not $m$). We further consider fair and truthful mechanisms that also satisfy the\nstandard efficiency guarantee: Pareto-optimality. We provide a mechanism that\nsimultaneously achieves truthfulness, EF$1$, and Pareto-optimality for\nbi-valued utilities (where agents' valuation on each item is either $p$ or $q$\nfor some $p>q\\geq0$). For tri-valued utilities (where agents' valuations on\neach item belong to $\\{p,q,r\\}$ for some $p>q>r\\geq0$) and any $u,v$, we show\nthat truthfulness is incompatible with EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ and Pareto-optimality\neven for two agents.","PeriodicalId":501316,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Computer Science and Game Theory","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Truthful and Almost Envy-Free Mechanism of Allocating Indivisible Goods: the Power of Randomness\",\"authors\":\"Xiaolin Bu, Biaoshuai Tao\",\"doi\":\"arxiv-2407.13634\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We study the problem of fairly and truthfully allocating $m$ indivisible\\nitems to $n$ agents with additive preferences. Specifically, we consider\\ntruthful mechanisms outputting allocations that satisfy EF$^{+u}_{-v}$, where,\\nin an EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ allocation, for any pair of agents $i$ and $j$, agent $i$\\nwill not envy agent $j$ if $u$ items were added to $i$'s bundle and $v$ items\\nwere removed from $j$'s bundle. Previous work easily indicates that, when\\nrestricted to deterministic mechanisms, truthfulness will lead to a poor\\nguarantee of fairness: even with two agents, for any $u$ and $v$,\\nEF$^{+u}_{-v}$ cannot be guaranteed by truthful mechanisms when the number of\\nitems is large enough. In this work, we focus on randomized mechanisms, where\\nwe consider ex-ante truthfulness and ex-post fairness. For two agents, we\\npresent a truthful mechanism that achieves EF$^{+0}_{-1}$ (i.e., the\\nwell-studied fairness notion EF$1$). For three agents, we present a truthful\\nmechanism that achieves EF$^{+1}_{-1}$. For $n$ agents in general, we show that\\nthere exist truthful mechanisms that achieve EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ for some $u$ and\\n$v$ that depend only on $n$ (not $m$). We further consider fair and truthful mechanisms that also satisfy the\\nstandard efficiency guarantee: Pareto-optimality. We provide a mechanism that\\nsimultaneously achieves truthfulness, EF$1$, and Pareto-optimality for\\nbi-valued utilities (where agents' valuation on each item is either $p$ or $q$\\nfor some $p>q\\\\geq0$). For tri-valued utilities (where agents' valuations on\\neach item belong to $\\\\{p,q,r\\\\}$ for some $p>q>r\\\\geq0$) and any $u,v$, we show\\nthat truthfulness is incompatible with EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ and Pareto-optimality\\neven for two agents.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501316,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv - CS - Computer Science and Game Theory\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv - CS - Computer Science and Game Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/arxiv-2407.13634\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Computer Science and Game Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2407.13634","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

我们研究的问题是,如何将 $m$ 不可分割的物品公平、真实地分配给具有相加偏好的 $n$ 代理人。具体来说,我们考虑的是输出满足 EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ 的分配的真实机制,在 EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ 分配中,对于任意一对代理 $i$ 和 $j$,如果 $i$ 的捆绑物品中增加了 $u$,而 $j$ 的捆绑物品中删除了 $v$,那么代理 $i$ 不会嫉妒代理 $j$。以前的研究很容易就表明,如果仅限于确定性机制,真实性将导致对公平性的不良保证:即使有两个代理人,对于任意 $u$ 和 $v$,当物品数量足够大时,真实性机制也不能保证 EF$^{+u}_{-v}$。在这项工作中,我们将重点放在随机机制上,考虑事前的真实性和事后的公平性。对于两个代理人,我们提出了一种可达到 EF$^{+0}_{-1}$ 的真实机制(即已被广泛研究的公平性概念 EF$1$)。对于三个代理,我们提出了一种可实现 EF$^{+1}_{-1}$ 的真实机制。对于一般的 $n$ 代理,我们证明了存在能够实现 EF$^{+u}_{-v}$的真实机制,对于某些 $u$ 和 $v$,它们只取决于 $n$(而不是 $m$)。我们将进一步考虑同样满足标准效率保证的公平真实机制:帕累托最优。我们提供了一种机制,它能同时实现真实性、EF$1$ 和帕累托最优性(其中代理人对每个项目的估值要么是 $p$ 要么是 $q$,而某个 $p>q\geq0$)。对于三值效用(即代理人对每个项目的估值都属于$\{p,q,r\}$,对于某个$p>q>r\geq0$)和任意$u,v$,我们证明了真实性与EF$^{+u}_{-v}$和帕累托最优性不相容,甚至对于两个代理人也是如此。
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
Truthful and Almost Envy-Free Mechanism of Allocating Indivisible Goods: the Power of Randomness
We study the problem of fairly and truthfully allocating $m$ indivisible items to $n$ agents with additive preferences. Specifically, we consider truthful mechanisms outputting allocations that satisfy EF$^{+u}_{-v}$, where, in an EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ allocation, for any pair of agents $i$ and $j$, agent $i$ will not envy agent $j$ if $u$ items were added to $i$'s bundle and $v$ items were removed from $j$'s bundle. Previous work easily indicates that, when restricted to deterministic mechanisms, truthfulness will lead to a poor guarantee of fairness: even with two agents, for any $u$ and $v$, EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ cannot be guaranteed by truthful mechanisms when the number of items is large enough. In this work, we focus on randomized mechanisms, where we consider ex-ante truthfulness and ex-post fairness. For two agents, we present a truthful mechanism that achieves EF$^{+0}_{-1}$ (i.e., the well-studied fairness notion EF$1$). For three agents, we present a truthful mechanism that achieves EF$^{+1}_{-1}$. For $n$ agents in general, we show that there exist truthful mechanisms that achieve EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ for some $u$ and $v$ that depend only on $n$ (not $m$). We further consider fair and truthful mechanisms that also satisfy the standard efficiency guarantee: Pareto-optimality. We provide a mechanism that simultaneously achieves truthfulness, EF$1$, and Pareto-optimality for bi-valued utilities (where agents' valuation on each item is either $p$ or $q$ for some $p>q\geq0$). For tri-valued utilities (where agents' valuations on each item belong to $\{p,q,r\}$ for some $p>q>r\geq0$) and any $u,v$, we show that truthfulness is incompatible with EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ and Pareto-optimality even for two agents.
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
MALADY: Multiclass Active Learning with Auction Dynamics on Graphs Mechanism Design for Extending the Accessibility of Facilities Common revenue allocation in DMUs with two stages based on DEA cross-efficiency and cooperative game The common revenue allocation based on modified Shapley value and DEA cross-efficiency On Robustness to $k$-wise Independence of Optimal Bayesian Mechanisms
×
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