Search for: All records

We present a study on a repeated delegated choice problem, which is the first to consider an online learning variant of Kleinberg and Kleinberg, EC'18. In this model, a principal interacts repeatedly with an agent who possesses an exogenous set of solutions to search for efficient ones. Each solution can yield varying utility for both the principal and the agent, and the agent may propose a solution to maximize its own utility in a selfish manner. To mitigate this behavior, the principal announces an eligible set which screens out a certain set of solutions. The principal, however, does not have any information on the distribution of solutions nor the number of solutions in advance. Therefore, the principal dynamically announces various eligible sets to efficiently learn the distribution. The principal's objective is to minimize cumulative regret compared to the optimal eligible set in hindsight. We explore two dimensions of the problem setup, whether the agent behaves myopically or strategizes across the rounds, and whether the solutions yield deterministic or stochastic utility. We obtain sublinear regret upper bounds in various regimes, and derive corresponding lower bounds which implies the tightness of the results. Overall, we bridge a well-known problem in economics to the evolving area of online learning, and present a comprehensive study in this problem. 

We study the problem of fair allocation for indivisible goods. We use the maximin share paradigm introduced by Budish [Budish E (2011) The combinatorial assignment problem: Approximate competitive equilibrium from equal incomes. J. Political Econom. 119(6):1061–1103.] as a measure of fairness. Kurokawa et al. [Kurokawa D, Procaccia AD, Wang J (2018) Fair enough: Guaranteeing approximate maximin shares. J. ACM 65(2):8.] were the first to investigate this fundamental problem in the additive setting. They showed that in delicately constructed examples, not everyone can obtain a utility of at least her maximin value. They mitigated this impossibility result with a beautiful observation: no matter how the utility functions are made, we always can allocate the items to the agents to guarantee each agent’s utility is at least 2/3 of her maximin value. They left open whether this bound can be improved. Our main contribution answers this question in the affirmative. We improve their approximation result to a 3/4 factor guarantee.