skip to main content

Title: From Monetary to Non-Monetary Mechanism Design via Artificial Currencies
Non-monetary mechanisms for repeated resource allocation are gaining widespread use in many real-world settings. Our aim in this work is to study the allocative efficiency and incentive properties of simple repeated mechanisms based on artificial currencies. Within this framework, we make three main contributions: We provide a general black-box technique to convert any static monetary mechanism to a dynamic mechanism with artificial currency, that simultaneously guarantees vanishing loss in efficiency, and vanishing gains from non-truthful bidding over time. On a computational front, we show how such a mechanism can be implemented using only sample-access to the agents' type distributions, and requires roughly twice the amount of computation as needed to run the monetary mechanism alone. For settings with two agents, we show that a particular artificial currency mechanism also results in a vanishing price of anarchy. This provides additional justification for the use of artificial currency mechanisms in practice. Moreover, we show how to leverage this result to demonstrate the existence of a Bayesian incentive-compatible mechanism with vanishing efficiency loss in this setting. Our work takes a significant step towards bridging the gap between monetary and non-monetary mechanisms, and also points to several open problems.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1633920 1462592
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC)
Page Range / eLocation ID:
563 to 564
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. null (Ed.)
    Nonmonetary mechanisms for repeated allocation and decision making are gaining widespread use in many real-world settings. Our aim in this work is to study the performance and incentive properties of simple mechanisms based on artificial currencies in such settings. To this end, we make the following contributions: For a general allocation setting, we provide two black-box approaches to convert any one-shot monetary mechanism to a dynamic nonmonetary mechanism using an artificial currency that simultaneously guarantees vanishing gains from nontruthful reporting over time and vanishing losses in performance. The two mechanisms trade off between their applicability and their computational and informational requirements. Furthermore, for settings with two agents, we show that a particular artificial currency mechanism also results in a vanishing price of anarchy. 
    more » « less
  2. null (Ed.)
    Public goods are often either over-consumed in the absence of regulatory mechanisms, or remain completely unused, as in the Covid-19 pandemic, where social distance constraints are enforced to limit the number of people who can share public spaces. In this work, we plug this gap through market based mechanisms designed to efficiently allocate capacity constrained public goods. To design these mechanisms, we leverage the theory of Fisher markets, wherein each agent in the economy is endowed with an artificial currency budget that they can spend to avail public goods. While Fisher markets provide a strong methodological backbone to model resource allocation problems, their applicability is limited to settings involving two types of constraints - budgets of individual buyers and capacities of goods. Thus, we introduce a modified Fisher market, where each individual may have additional physical constraints, characterize its solution properties and establish the existence of a market equilibrium. Furthermore, to account for additional constraints we introduce a social convex optimization problem where we perturb the budgets of agents such that the KKT conditions of the perturbed social problem establishes equilibrium prices. Finally, to compute the budget perturbations we present a fixed point scheme and illustrate convergence guarantees through numerical experiments. Thus, our mechanism, both theoretically and computationally, overcomes a fundamental limitation of classical Fisher markets, which only consider capacity and budget constraints. 
    more » « less
  3. We revisit the well-studied problem of designing mechanisms for one-sided matching markets, where a set of n agents needs to be matched to a set of n heterogeneous items. Each agent i has a value vij for each item j, and these values are private information that the agents may misreport if doing so leads to a preferred outcome. Ensuring that the agents have no incentive to misreport requires a careful design of the matching mechanism, and mechanisms proposed in the literature mitigate this issue by eliciting only the ordinal preferences of the agents, i.e., their ranking of the items from most to least preferred. However, the efficiency guarantees of these mechanisms are based only on weak measures that are oblivious to the underlying values. In this paper we achieve stronger performance guarantees by introducing a mechanism that truthfully elicits the full cardinal preferences of the agents, i.e., all of the vij values. We evaluate the performance of this mechanism using the much more demanding Nash bargaining solution as a benchmark, and we prove that our mechanism significantly outperforms all ordinal mechanisms (even non-truthful ones). To prove our approximation bounds, we also study the population monotonicity of the Nash bargaining solution in the context of matching markets, providing both upper and lower bounds which are of independent interest. 
    more » « less
  4. We study the problem of approximating maximum Nash social welfare (NSW) when allocatingmindivisible items amongnasymmetric agents with submodular valuations. TheNSWis a well-established notion of fairness and efficiency, defined as the weighted geometric mean of agents’ valuations. For special cases of the problem with symmetric agents and additive(-like) valuation functions, approximation algorithms have been designed using approaches customized for these specific settings, and they fail to extend to more general settings. Hence, no approximation algorithm with a factor independent ofmwas known either for asymmetric agents with additive valuations or for symmetric agents beyond additive(-like) valuations before this work.

    In this article, we extend our understanding of theNSWproblem to far more general settings. Our main contribution is two approximation algorithms for asymmetric agents with additive and submodular valuations. Both algorithms are simple to understand and involve non-trivial modifications of a greedy repeated matchings approach. Allocations of high-valued items are done separately by un-matching certain items and re-matching them by different processes in both algorithms. We show that these approaches achieve approximation factors ofO(n) andO(nlogn) for additive and submodular cases, independent of the number of items. For additive valuations, our algorithm outputs an allocation that also achieves the fairness property of envy-free up to one item (EF1).

    Furthermore, we show that theNSWproblem under submodular valuations is strictly harder than all currently known settings with an\(\frac{\mathrm{e}}{\mathrm{e}-1}\)factor of the hardness of approximation, even for constantly many agents. For this case, we provide a different approximation algorithm that achieves a factor of\(\frac{\mathrm{e}}{\mathrm{e}-1}\), hence resolving it completely.

    more » « less
  5. We study the design of a class of incentive mechanisms that can effectively prevent cheating in a strategic classification and regression problem. A conventional strategic classification or regression problem is modeled as a Stackelberg game, or a principal-agent problem between the designer of a classifier (the principal) and individuals subject to the classifier's decisions (the agents), potentially from different demographic groups. The former benefits from the accuracy of its decisions, whereas the latter may have an incentive to game the algorithm into making favorable but erroneous decisions. While prior works tend to focus on how to design an algorithm to be more robust to such strategic maneuvering, this study focuses on an alternative, which is to design incentive mechanisms to shape the utilities of the agents and induce effort that genuinely improves their skills, which in turn benefits both parties in the Stackelberg game. Specifically, the principal and the mechanism provider (which could also be the principal itself) move together in the first stage, publishing and committing to a classifier and an incentive mechanism. The agents are (simultaneous) second movers and best respond to the published classifier and incentive mechanism. When an agent's strategic action merely changes its observable features, it hurts the performance of the algorithm. However, if the action leads to improvement in the agent's true label, it not only helps the agent achieve better decision outcomes, but also preserves the performance of the algorithm. We study how a subsidy mechanism can induce improvement actions, positively impact a number of social well-being metrics, such as the overall skill levels of the agents (efficiency) and positive or true positive rate differences between different demographic groups (fairness). 
    more » « less