An official website of the United States government
We study a variation of facility location problems (FLPs) that aims to improve the accessibility of agents to the facility within the context of mechanism design without money. In such a variation, agents have preferences on the ideal locations of the facility on a real line, and the facility’s location is fixed in advance where (re)locating the facility is not possible due to various constraints (e.g., limited space and construction costs). To improve the accessibility of agents to facilities, existing mechanism design literature in FLPs has proposed to structurally modify the real line (e.g., by adding a new interval) or provide shuttle services between two points when structural modifications are not possible. In this paper, we focus on the latter approach and propose to construct an accessibility range to extend the accessibility of the facility. In the range, agents can receive accommodations (e.g., school buses, campus shuttles, or pickup services) to help reach the facility. Therefore, the cost of each agent is the distance from their ideal location to the facility (possibility) through the range. We focus on designing strategyproof mechanisms that elicit true ideal locations from the agents and construct accessibility ranges (intervals) to approximately minimize the social cost or the maximum cost of agents. For both social and maximum costs, we design group strategyproof mechanisms and strong group strategyproof mechanisms with (asymptotically) tight bounds on the approximation ratios.
more »
« less
Altruism in Facility Location Problems
We study the facility location problems (FLPs) with altruistic agents who act to benefit others in their affiliated groups. Our aim is to design mechanisms that elicit true locations from the agents in different overlapping groups and place a facility to serve agents to approximately optimize a given objective based on agents' costs to the facility. Existing studies of FLPs consider myopic agents who aim to minimize their own costs to the facility. We mainly consider altruistic agents with well-motivated group costs that are defined over costs incurred by all agents in their groups. Accordingly, we define Pareto strategyproofness to account for altruistic agents and their multiple group memberships with incomparable group costs. We consider mechanisms satisfying this strategyproofness under various combinations of the planner's objectives and agents' group costs. For each of these settings, we provide upper and lower bounds of approximation ratios of the mechanisms satisfying Pareto strategyproofness.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10632688
- Publisher / Repository:
- AAAI
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
- Volume:
- 38
- Issue:
- 9
- ISSN:
- 2159-5399
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 9993 to 10001
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
In the assignment problem, the goal is to assign indivisible items to agents who have ordinal preferences, efficiently and fairly, in a strategyproof manner. In practice, first-choice maximality, i.e., assigning a maximal number of agents their top items, is often identified as an important efficiency criterion and measure of agents' satisfaction. In this paper, we propose a natural and intuitive efficiency property, favoring-eagerness-for-remaining-items (FERI), which requires that each item is allocated to an agent who ranks it highest among remaining items, thereby implying first-choice maximality. Using FERI as a heuristic, we design mechanisms that satisfy ex-post or ex-ante variants of FERI together with combinations of other desirable properties of efficiency (Pareto-efficiency), fairness (strong equal treatment of equals and sd-weak-envy-freeness), and strategyproofness (sd-weak-strategyproofness). We also explore the limits of FERI mechanisms in providing stronger efficiency, fairness, or strategyproofness guarantees through impossibility results.more » « less
-
We study the group-fair multi-period mobile facility location problems, where agents from different groups are located on a real line and arrive in different periods. Our goal is to locate k mobile facilities at each period to serve the arriving agents in order to minimize the maximum total group-fair cost and the maximum average group-fair cost objectives that measure the costs or distances of groups of agents to their corresponding facilities across all periods. We first consider the problems from the algorithmic perspective for both group-fair cost objectives. We then consider the problems from the mechanism design perspective, where the agents' locations and arrival periods are private. For both objectives, we design deterministic strategyproof mechanisms to elicit the agents' locations and arrival periods truthfully while optimizing the group-fair cost objectives and show that our mechanisms have almost tight bounds on the approximation ratios for certain periods and settings. Finally, we discuss the extensions of our results to the online setting where agent arrival information is only known at each period.more » « less
-
We study the group-fair obnoxious facility location problems from the mechanism design perspective where agents belong to different groups and have private location preferences on the undesirable locations of the facility. Our main goal is to design strategyproof mechanisms that elicit the true location preferences from the agents and determine a facility location that approximately optimizes several group-fair objectives. We first consider the maximum total and average group cost (group-fair) objectives. For these objectives, we propose deterministic mechanisms that achieve 3-approximation ratios and provide matching lower bounds. We then provide the characterization of 2-candidate strategyproof randomized mechanisms. Leveraging the characterization, we design randomized mechanisms with improved approximation ratios of 2 for both objectives. We also provide randomized lower bounds of 5/4 for both objectives. Moreover, we investigate intergroup and intragroup fairness (IIF) objectives, addressing fairness between groups and within each group. We present a mechanism that achieves a 4-approximation for the IIF objectives and provide tight lower bounds.more » « less
-
We study how partial information about scoring rulesaffects fairness in strategic learning settings. Instrategic learning, a learner deploys a scoring rule, andagents respond strategically by modifying theirfeatures---at some cost--—to improve their outcomes.However, in our work, agents do not observe the scoringrule directly; instead, they receive a noisy signalof said rule. We consider two different agent models: (i)naive agents, who take the noisy signal at facevalue, and (ii) Bayesian agents, who update a priorbelief based on the signal.Our goal is to understand how disparities in outcomes arisebetween groups that differ in their costs of featuremodification, and how these disparities vary with thelevel of transparency of the learner's rule. Fornaive agents, we show that utility disparities can growunboundedly with noise, and that the group with lower costscan, perhaps counter-intuitively, be disproportionatelyharmed under limited transparency. In contrast, forBayesian agents, disparities remain bounded. We provide afull characterization of disparities across groups as afunction of the level of transparency and show that theycan vary non-monotonically with noise; inparticular, disparities are often minimized atintermediate levels of transparency. Finally, weextend our analysis to settings where groups differ notonly in cost, but also in prior beliefs, and study how thisasymmetry influences fairness.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v38i9.28862
