An official website of the United States government
We study fair resource allocation with strategic agents. It is well-known that, across multiple fundamental problems in this domain, truthfulness and fairness are incompatible. For example, when allocating indivisible goods, no truthful and deterministic mechanism can guarantee envy-freeness up to one item (EF1), even for two agents with additive valuations. Or, in cake-cutting, no truthful and deterministic mechanism always outputs a proportional allocation, even for two agents with piecewise constant valuations. Our work stems from the observation that, in the context of fair division, truthfulness is used as a synonym for Dominant Strategy Incentive Compatibility (DSIC), requiring that an agent prefers reporting the truth, no matter what other agents report.In this paper, we instead focus on Bayesian Incentive Compatible (BIC) mechanisms, requiring that agents are better off reporting the truth in expectation over other agents' reports. We prove that, when agents know a bit less about each other, a lot more is possible: using BIC mechanisms we can achieve fairness notions that are unattainable by DSIC mechanisms in both the fundamental problems of allocation of indivisible goods and cake-cutting. We prove that this is the case even for an arbitrary number of agents, as long as the agents' priors about each others' types satisfy a neutrality condition. Notably, for the case of indivisible goods, we significantly strengthen the state-of-the-art negative result for efficient DSIC mechanisms, while also highlighting the limitations of BIC mechanisms, by showing that a very general class of welfare objectives is incompatible with Bayesian Incentive Compatibility. Combined, these results give a near-complete picture of the power and limitations of BIC and DSIC mechanisms for the problem of allocating indivisible goods.
more »
« less
Verifying Cake-Cutting, Faster
Envy-free cake-cutting protocols procedurally divide an infinitely divisible good among a set of agents so that no agent prefers another's allocation to their own. These protocols are highly complex and difficult to prove correct. Recently, Bertram, Levinson, and Hsu introduced a language called Slice for describing and verifying cake-cutting protocols. Slice programs can be translated to formulas encoding envy-freeness, which are solved by SMT. While Slice works well on smaller protocols, it has difficulty scaling to more complex cake-cutting protocols. We improve Slice in two ways. First, we show any protocol execution in Slice can be replicated using piecewise uniform valuations. We then reduce Slice's constraint formulas to formulas within the theory of linear real arithmetic, showing that verifying envy-freeness is efficiently decidable. Second, we design and implement a linear type system which enforces that no two agents receive the same part of the good. We implement our methods and verify a range of challenging examples, including the first nontrivial four-agent protocol.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2319186
- PAR ID:
- 10513386
- Publisher / Repository:
- Springer
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- International Conference on Computer Aided Verification
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Montreal, Québec
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)We initiate the study of multi-layered cake cutting with the goal of fairly allocating multiple divisible resources (layers of a cake) among a set of agents. The key requirement is that each agent can only utilize a single resource at each time interval. Several real-life applications exhibit such restrictions on overlapping pieces, for example, assigning time intervals over multiple facilities and resources or assigning shifts to medical professionals. We investigate the existence and computation of envy-free and proportional allocations. We show that envy-free allocations that are both feasible and contiguous are guaranteed to exist for up to three agents with two types of preferences, when the number of layers is two. We further devise an algorithm for computing proportional allocations for any number of agents when the number of layers is factorable to three and/or some power of two.more » « less
-
We here address the problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods or chores to n agents with weights that define their entitlement to the set of indivisible resources. Stemming from well-studied fairness concepts such as envy-freeness up to one good (EF1) and envy-freeness up to any good (EFX) for agents with equal entitlements, we present, in this study, the first set of impossibility results alongside algorithmic guarantees for fairness among agents with unequal entitlements.Within this paper, we expand the concept of envy-freeness up to any good or chore to the weighted context (WEFX and XWEF respectively), demonstrating that these allocations are not guaranteed to exist for two or three agents. Despite these negative results, we develop a WEFX procedure for two agents with integer weights, and furthermore, we devise an approximate WEFX procedure for two agents with normalized weights. We further present a polynomial-time algorithm that guarantees a weighted envy-free allocation up to one chore (1WEF) for any number of agents with additive cost functions. Our work underscores the heightened complexity of the weighted fair division problem when compared to its unweighted counterpart.more » « less
-
We consider the task of assigning indivisible goods to a set of agents in a fair manner. Our notion of fairness is Nash social welfare, i.e., the goal is to maximize the geometric mean of the utilities of the agents. Each good comes in multiple items or copies, and the utility of an agent diminishes as it receives more items of the same good. The utility of a bundle of items for an agent is the sum of the utilities of the items in the bundle. Each agent has a utility cap beyond which he does not value additional items. We give a polynomial time approximation algorithm that maximizes Nash social welfare up to a factor of e^{1/{e}} ~ 1.445. The computed allocation is Pareto-optimal and approximates envy-freeness up to one item up to a factor of 2 + epsilon.more » « less
-
A well-regarded fairness notion when dividing indivisible chores is envy-freeness up to one item (EF1), which requires that pairwise envy can be eliminated by the removal of a single item. While an EF1 and Pareto optimal (PO) allocation of goods can always be found via well-known algorithms, even the existence of such solutions for chores remains open, to date. We take an epistemic approach utilizing information asymmetry by introducing dubious chores–items that inflict no cost on receiving agents but are perceived costly by others. On a technical level, dubious chores provide a more fine-grained approximation of envy-freeness than EF1. We show that finding allocations with minimal number of dubious chores is computationally hard. Nonetheless, we prove the existence of envy-free and fractional PO allocations for n agents with only 2n−2 dubious chores and strengthen it to n−1 dubious chores in four special classes of valuations. Our experimental analysis demonstrates that often only a few dubious chores are needed to achieve envy-freeness.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
