An official website of the United States government
We study linear Fisher markets with satiation. In these markets, sellers have earning limits, and buyers have utility limits. Beyond applications in economics, they arise in the context of maximizing Nash social welfare when allocating indivisible items to agents. In contrast to markets with either earning or utility limits, markets with both limits have not been studied before. They turn out to have fundamentally different properties. In general, the existence of competitive equilibria is not guaranteed. We identify a natural property of markets (termed money clearing) that implies existence. We show that the set of equilibria is not always convex, answering a question posed in the literature. We design an FPTAS to compute an approximate equilibrium and prove that the problem of computing an exact equilibrium lies in the complexity class continuous local search ([Formula: see text]; i.e., the intersection of polynomial local search ([Formula: see text]) and polynomial parity arguments on directed graphs ([Formula: see text])). For a constant number of buyers or goods, we give a polynomial-time algorithm to compute an exact equilibrium. We show how (approximate) equilibria can be rounded and provide the first constant-factor approximation algorithm (with a factor of 2.404) for maximizing Nash social welfare when agents have capped linear (also known as budget-additive) valuations. Finally, we significantly improve the approximation hardness for additive valuations to [Formula: see text]. Funding: J. Garg was supported by the National Science Foundation [Grant CCF-1942321 (CAREER)]. M. Hoefer was supported by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [Grants Ho 3831/5-1, Ho 3831/6-1, and Ho 3831/7-1].
more »
« less
A Complementary Pivot Algorithm for Competitive Allocation of a Mixed Manna
We study the fair division problem of allocating a mixed manna under additively separable piecewise linear concave (SPLC) utilities. A mixed manna contains goods that everyone likes and bads (chores) that everyone dislikes as well as items that some like and others dislike. The seminal work of Bogomolnaia et al. argues why allocating a mixed manna is genuinely more complicated than a good or a bad manna and why competitive equilibrium is the best mechanism. It also provides the existence of equilibrium and establishes its distinctive properties (e.g., nonconvex and disconnected set of equilibria even under linear utilities) but leaves the problem of computing an equilibrium open. Our main results are a linear complementarity problem formulation that captures all competitive equilibria of a mixed manna under SPLC utilities (a strict generalization of linear) and a complementary pivot algorithm based on Lemke’s scheme for finding one. Experimental results on randomly generated instances suggest that our algorithm is fast in practice. Given the [Formula: see text]-hardness of the problem, designing such an algorithm is the only non–brute force (nonenumerative) option known; for example, the classic Lemke–Howson algorithm for computing a Nash equilibrium in a two-player game is still one of the most widely used algorithms in practice. Our algorithm also yields several new structural properties as simple corollaries. We obtain a (constructive) proof of existence for a far more general setting, membership of the problem in [Formula: see text], a rational-valued solution, and an odd number of solutions property. The last property also settles the conjecture of Bogomolnaia et al. in the affirmative. Furthermore, we show that, if the number of either agents or items is a constant, then the number of pivots in our algorithm is strongly polynomial when the mixed manna contains all bads.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10403794
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Mathematics of Operations Research
- ISSN:
- 0364-765X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Fair division is the problem of allocating a set of items among a set of agents in a fair and efficient way. It arises naturally in a wide range of real-life settings. Competitive equilibrium (CE) is a central solution concept in economics to study markets, and due to its remarkable fairness and efficiency properties (e.g., envy-freeness, proportionality, core stability, Pareto optimality), it is also one of the most preferred mechanisms for fair division even though there is no money involved. The vast majority of work in fair division focuses on the case of disposable goods, which all agents like or can throw away at no cost. In this paper, we consider the case of mixed manna under linear utilities where some items are positive goods liked by all agents, some are bads (chores) that no one likes, and remaining some agents like and others dislike. The recent work of Bogomolnaia et al. [13] initiated the study of CE in mixed manna. They establish that a CE always exists and maintains all the nice properties found in the case of all goods. However, computing a CE of mixed manna is genuinely harder than in the case of all goods due to the nonconvex and disconnected nature of the CE set. Our main result is a polynomial-time algorithm for computing a CE of mixed manna when the number of agents or items is constant.more » « less
-
We study markets with mixed manna, where m divisible goods and chores shall be divided among n agents to obtain a competitive equilibrium. Equilibrium allocations are known to satisfy many fairness and efficiency conditions. While a lot of recent work in fair division is restricted to linear utilities and chores, we focus on a substantial generalization to separable piecewise-linear and concave (SPLC) utilities and mixed manna. We first derive polynomial-time algorithms for markets with a constant number of items or a constant number of agents. Our main result is a polynomial-time algorithm for instances with a constant number of chores (as well as any number of goods and agents) under the condition that chores dominate the utility of the agents. Interestingly, this stands in contrast to the case when the goods dominate the agents utility in equilibrium, where the problem is known to be PPAD-hard even without chores.more » « less
-
We study the problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods among n agents with additive valuations. Envy freeness up to any good (EFX) is arguably the most compelling fairness notion in this context. However, the existence of an EFX allocation has not been settled and is one of the most important problems in fair division. Toward resolving this question, many impressive results show the existence of its relaxations. In particular, it is known that 0.618-EFX allocations exist and that EFX allocation exists if we do not allocate at most (n-1) goods. Reducing the number of unallocated goods has emerged as a systematic way to tackle the main question. For example, follow-up works on three- and four-agents cases, respectively, allocated two more unallocated goods through an involved procedure. In this paper, we study the general case and achieve sublinear numbers of unallocated goods. Through a new approach, we show that for every [Formula: see text], there always exists a [Formula: see text]-EFX allocation with sublinear number of unallocated goods and high Nash welfare. For this, we reduce the EFX problem to a novel problem in extremal graph theory. We define the notion of rainbow cycle number [Formula: see text] in directed graphs. For all [Formula: see text] is the largest k such that there exists a k-partite graph [Formula: see text], in which each part has at most d vertices (i.e., [Formula: see text] for all [Formula: see text]); for any two parts Viand Vj, each vertex in Vihas an incoming edge from some vertex in Vjand vice versa; and there exists no cycle in G that contains at most one vertex from each part. We show that any upper bound on [Formula: see text] directly translates to a sublinear bound on the number of unallocated goods. We establish a polynomial upper bound on [Formula: see text], yielding our main result. Furthermore, our approach is constructive, which also gives a polynomial-time algorithm for finding such an allocation. Funding: J. Garg was supported by the Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering [Grant CCF-1942321]. R. Mehta was supported by the Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering [Grant CCF-1750436].more » « less
-
This article studies a problem of strategic network inspection, in which a defender (agency) is tasked with detecting the presence of multiple attacks in the network. An inspection strategy entails monitoring the network components, possibly in a randomized manner, using a given number of detectors. We formulate the network inspection problem [Formula: see text] as a large-scale bilevel optimization problem, in which the defender seeks to determine an inspection strategy with minimum number of detectors that ensures a target expected detection rate under worst-case attacks. We show that optimal solutions of [Formula: see text] can be obtained from the equilibria of a large-scale zero-sum game. Our equilibrium analysis involves both game-theoretic and combinatorial arguments and leads to a computationally tractable approach to solve [Formula: see text]. First, we construct an approximate solution by using solutions of minimum set cover (MSC) and maximum set packing (MSP) problems and evaluate its detection performance. In fact, this construction generalizes some of the known results in network security games. Second, we leverage properties of the optimal detection rate to iteratively refine our MSC/MSP-based solution through a column generation procedure. Computational results on benchmark water networks demonstrate the scalability, performance, and operational feasibility of our approach. The results indicate that utilities can achieve a high level of protection in large-scale networks by strategically positioning a small number of detectors.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1287/moor.2022.1315
