An official website of the United States government
We consider the problem of allocating divisible items among multiple agents, and consider the setting where any agent is allowed to introduce {\emph diversity constraints} on the items they are allocated. We motivate this via settings where the items themselves correspond to user ad slots or task workers with attributes such as race and gender on which the principal seeks to achieve demographic parity. We consider the following question: When an agent expresses diversity constraints into an allocation rule, is the allocation of other agents hurt significantly? If this happens, the cost of introducing such constraints is disproportionately borne by agents who do not benefit from diversity. We codify this via two desiderata capturing {\em robustness}. These are {\emph no negative externality} -- other agents are not hurt -- and {\emph monotonicity} -- the agent enforcing the constraint does not see a large increase in value. We show in a formal sense that the Nash Welfare rule that maximizes product of agent values is {\emph uniquely} positioned to be robust when diversity constraints are introduced, while almost all other natural allocation rules fail this criterion. We also show that the guarantees achieved by Nash Welfare are nearly optimal within a widely studied class of allocation rules. We finally perform an empirical simulation on real-world data that models ad allocations to show that this gap between Nash Welfare and other rules persists in the wild.
more »
« less
Markets Beyond Nash Welfare for Leontief Utilities
We study the allocation of divisible goods to competing agents via a market mechanism, focusing on agents with Leontief utilities. The majority of the economics and mechanism design literature has focused on \emph{linear} prices, meaning that the cost of a good is proportional to the quantity purchased. Equilibria for linear prices are known to be exactly the maximum Nash welfare allocations. \emph{Price curves} allow the cost of a good to be any (increasing) function of the quantity purchased. We show that price curve equilibria are not limited to maximum Nash welfare allocations with two main results. First, we show that an allocation can be supported by strictly increasing price curves if and only if it is \emph{group-domination-free}. A similarly characterization holds for weakly increasing price curves. We use this to show that given any allocation, we can compute strictly (or weakly) increasing price curves that support it (or show that none exist) in polynomial time. These results involve a connection to the \emph{agent-order matrix} of an allocation, which may have other applications. Second, we use duality to show that in the bandwidth allocation setting, any allocation maximizing a CES welfare function can be supported by price curves.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1637418
- PAR ID:
- 10139078
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Web and Internet Economics
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 340
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
We study the problem of allocating indivisible items to budget-constrained agents, aiming to provide fairness and efficiency guarantees. Specifically, our goal is to ensure that the resulting allocation is envy-free up to any item (EFx) while minimizing the amount of inefficiency that this needs to introduce. We first show that there exist two-agent problem instances for which no EFx allocation is Pareto-efficient. We, therefore, turn to approximation and use the (Pareto-efficient) maximum Nash welfare allocation as a benchmark. For two-agent instances, we provide a procedure that always returns an EFx allocation while achieving the best possible approximation of the optimal Nash social welfare that EFx allocations can achieve. For the more complicated case of three-agent instances, we provide a procedure that guarantees EFx, while achieving a constant approximation of the optimal Nash social welfare for any number of items.more » « less
-
Vorobeychik, Y; Das, S; Nowe, A (Ed.)We study the problem of fair allocation of indivisible items when agents have ternary additive valuations --- each agent values each item at some fixed integer values a, b, or c that are common to all agents. The notions of fairness we consider are max Nash welfare (MNW), when a, b, and c are non-negative, and max egalitarian welfare (MEW). We show that for any distinct non-negative a, b, and c, maximizing Nash welfare is APX-hard --- i.e., the problem does not admit a PTAS unless P = NP. We also show that for any distinct a, b, and c, maximizing egalitarian welfare is APX-hard except for a few cases when b = 0 that admit efficient algorithms. These results make significant progress towards completely characterizing the complexity of computing exact MNW allocations and MEW allocations. En route, we resolve open questions left by prior work regarding the complexity of computing MNW allocations under bivalued valuations, and MEW allocations under ternary mixed manna.more » « less
-
We study the problem of distributing a set of indivisible goods among agents with additive valuations in afairmanner. The fairness notion under consideration is envy-freeness up toanygood (EFX). Despite significant efforts by many researchers for several years, the existence of EFX allocations has not been settled beyond the simple case of two agents. In this article, we show constructively that an EFX allocation always exists for three agents. Furthermore, we falsify the conjecture of Caragiannis et al. by showing an instance with three agents for which there is a partial EFX allocation (some goods are not allocated) with higher Nash welfare than that of any complete EFX allocation.more » « less
-
We study the problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods among agents with matroid rank valuations: every good provides a marginal value of 0 or 1 when added to a bundle and valuations are submodular.We present a simple algorithmic framework, calledGeneral Yankee Swap, that can efficiently compute allocations that maximize any justice criterion (or fairness objective) satisfying some mild assumptions. Along with maximizing a justice criterion, General Yankee Swap is guaranteed to maximize utilitarian social welfare, ensure strategyproofness and use at most a quadratic number of valuation queries. We show how General Yankee Swap can be used to compute allocations for five different well-studied justice criteria: (a) Prioritized Lorenz dominance, (b) Maximin fairness, (c) Weighted leximin, (d) Max weighted Nash welfare, and (e) Max weightedp-mean welfare.In particular, this framework provides the first polynomial time algorithms to compute weighted leximin, max weighted Nash welfare and max weightedp-mean welfare allocations for agents with matroid rank valuations. We also extend this framework to the setting of binary chores — items with marginal values -1 or 0 — and similarly show that it can be used to maximize any justice criteria satisfying some mild assumptions.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
