We study the problem of allocating a set of indivisible items to agents with additive utilities to maximize the Nash social welfare. Cole and Gkatzelis recently proved that this problem …
We study the problem of allocating a set of indivisible items to agents with additive utilities to maximize the Nash social welfare. Cole and Gkatzelis recently proved that this problem admits a constant factor approximation. We complement their result by showing that this problem is APX-hard.
We study the problem of allocating a set of indivisible items to agents with additive utilities to maximize the Nash social welfare. Cole and Gkatzelis recently proved that this problem …
We study the problem of allocating a set of indivisible items to agents with additive utilities to maximize the Nash social welfare. Cole and Gkatzelis recently proved that this problem admits a constant factor approximation. We complement their result by showing that this problem is APX-hard.
In the allocation of indivisible goods, the maximum Nash welfare (MNW) rule, which chooses an allocation maximizing the product of the agents' utilities, has received substantial attention for its fairness. …
In the allocation of indivisible goods, the maximum Nash welfare (MNW) rule, which chooses an allocation maximizing the product of the agents' utilities, has received substantial attention for its fairness. We characterize MNW as the only additive welfarist rule that satisfies envy-freeness up to one good. Our characterization holds even in the simplest setting of two agents.
The theory of algorithmic fair allocation is within the center of multi-agent systems and economics in the last decade due to its industrial and social importance. At a high level, …
The theory of algorithmic fair allocation is within the center of multi-agent systems and economics in the last decade due to its industrial and social importance. At a high level, the problem is to assign a set of items that are either goods or chores to a set of agents so that every agent is happy with what she obtains. Particularly, in this survey, we focus on indivisible items, for which absolute fairness such as envy-freeness and proportionality cannot be guaranteed. One main theme in the recent research agenda is about designing algorithms that approximately achieve the fairness criteria. We aim at presenting a comprehensive survey of recent progresses through the prism of algorithms, highlighting the ways to relax fairness notions and common techniques to design algorithms, as well as the most interesting questions for future research.
We study the problem of allocating indivisible goods among $n$ agents with the objective of maximizing Nash social welfare (NSW). This welfare function is defined as the geometric mean of …
We study the problem of allocating indivisible goods among $n$ agents with the objective of maximizing Nash social welfare (NSW). This welfare function is defined as the geometric mean of the agents' valuations and, hence, it strikes a balance between the extremes of social welfare (arithmetic mean) and egalitarian welfare (max-min value). Nash social welfare has been extensively studied in recent years for various valuation classes. In particular, a notable negative result is known when the agents' valuations are complement-free and are specified via value queries: for XOS valuations, one necessarily requires exponentially many value queries to find any sublinear (in $n$) approximation for NSW. Indeed, this lower bound implies that stronger query models are needed for finding better approximations. Towards this, we utilize demand oracles and XOS oracles; both of these query models are standard and have been used in prior work on social welfare maximization with XOS valuations. We develop the first sublinear approximation algorithm for maximizing Nash social welfare under XOS valuations, specified via demand and XOS oracles. Hence, this work breaks the $O(n)$-approximation barrier for NSW maximization under XOS valuations. We obtain this result by developing a novel connection between NSW and social welfare under a capped version of the agents' valuations. In addition to this insight, which might be of independent interest, this work relies on an intricate combination of multiple technical ideas, including the use of repeated matchings and the discrete moving knife method. In addition, we partially complement the algorithmic result by showing that, under XOS valuations, an exponential number of demand and XOS queries are necessarily required to approximate NSW within a factor of $\left(1 - \frac{1}{e}\right)$.
We study the problem of allocating indivisible goods among $n$ agents with the objective of maximizing Nash social welfare (NSW). This welfare function is defined as the geometric mean of …
We study the problem of allocating indivisible goods among $n$ agents with the objective of maximizing Nash social welfare (NSW). This welfare function is defined as the geometric mean of the agents' valuations and, hence, it strikes a balance between the extremes of social welfare (arithmetic mean) and egalitarian welfare (max-min value). Nash social welfare has been extensively studied in recent years for various valuation classes. In particular, a notable negative result is known when the agents' valuations are complement-free and are specified via value queries: for XOS valuations, one necessarily requires exponentially many value queries to find any sublinear (in $n$) approximation for NSW. Indeed, this lower bound implies that stronger query models are needed for finding better approximations. Towards this, we utilize demand oracles and XOS oracles; both of these query models are standard and have been used in prior work on social welfare maximization with XOS valuations.
We develop the first sublinear approximation algorithm for maximizing Nash social welfare under XOS valuations, specified via demand and XOS oracles. Hence, this work breaks the $O(n)$-approximation barrier for NSW maximization under XOS valuations. We obtain this result by developing a novel connection between NSW and social welfare under a capped version of the agents' valuations. In addition to this insight, which might be of independent interest, this work relies on an intricate combination of multiple technical ideas, including the use of repeated matchings and the discrete moving knife method.
The Competition Complexity of an auction setting refers to the number of additional bidders necessary in order for the (deterministic, prior-independent, dominant strategy truthful) Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism to achieve greater revenue …
The Competition Complexity of an auction setting refers to the number of additional bidders necessary in order for the (deterministic, prior-independent, dominant strategy truthful) Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism to achieve greater revenue than the (randomized, prior-dependent, Bayesian-truthful) optimal mechanism without the additional bidders.
The Competition Complexity of an auction setting refers to the number of additional bidders necessary in order for the (deterministic, prior-independent, dominant strategy truthful) Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism to achieve greater revenue …
The Competition Complexity of an auction setting refers to the number of additional bidders necessary in order for the (deterministic, prior-independent, dominant strategy truthful) Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism to achieve greater revenue than the (randomized, prior-dependent, Bayesian-truthful) optimal mechanism without the additional bidders. We prove that the competition complexity of $n$ bidders with additive valuations over $m$ independent items is at most $n(\ln(1+m/n)+2)$, and also at most $9\sqrt{nm}$. When $n \leq m$, the first bound is optimal up to constant factors, even when the items are i.i.d. and regular. When $n \geq m$, the second bound is optimal for the benchmark introduced in [EFFTW17a] up to constant factors, even when the items are i.i.d. and regular. We further show that, while the Eden et al. benchmark is not necessarily tight in the $n \geq m$ regime, the competition complexity of $n$ bidders with additive valuations over even $2$ i.i.d. regular items is indeed $\omega(1)$. Our main technical contribution is a reduction from analyzing the Eden et al. benchmark to proving stochastic dominance of certain random variables.
The Competition Complexity of an auction setting refers to the number of additional bidders necessary in order for the (deterministic, prior-independent, dominant strategy truthful) Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism to achieve greater revenue …
The Competition Complexity of an auction setting refers to the number of additional bidders necessary in order for the (deterministic, prior-independent, dominant strategy truthful) Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism to achieve greater revenue than the (randomized, prior-dependent, Bayesian-truthful) optimal mechanism without the additional bidders.
We prove that the competition complexity of $n$ bidders with additive valuations over $m$ independent items is at most $n(\ln(1+m/n)+2)$, and also at most $9\sqrt{nm}$. When $n \leq m$, the first bound is optimal up to constant factors, even when the items are i.i.d. and regular. When $n \geq m$, the second bound is optimal for the benchmark introduced in [EFFTW17a] up to constant factors, even when the items are i.i.d. and regular. We further show that, while the Eden et al. benchmark is not necessarily tight in the $n \geq m$ regime, the competition complexity of $n$ bidders with additive valuations over even $2$ i.i.d. regular items is indeed $\omega(1)$.
Our main technical contribution is a reduction from analyzing the Eden et al. benchmark to proving stochastic dominance of certain random variables.
We study fair allocation of resources consisting of both divisible and indivisible goods to agents with additive valuations. When only divisible or indivisible goods exist, it is known that an …
We study fair allocation of resources consisting of both divisible and indivisible goods to agents with additive valuations. When only divisible or indivisible goods exist, it is known that an allocation that achieves the maximum Nash welfare (MNW) satisfies the classic fairness notions based on envy. In addition, properties of the MNW allocations for binary valuations are known. In this paper, we show that when all agents' valuations are binary and linear for each good, an MNW allocation for mixed goods satisfies the envy-freeness up to any good for mixed goods. This notion is stronger than an existing one called envy-freeness for mixed goods (EFM), and our result generalizes the existing results for the case when only divisible or indivisible goods exist. Moreover, our result holds for a general fairness notion based on minimizing a symmetric strictly convex function. For the general additive valuations, we also provide a formal proof that an MNW allocation satisfies a weaker notion than EFM.
We prove that finding an $\epsilon$-approximate Nash equilibrium is PPAD-complete for constant $\epsilon$ and a particularly simple class of games: polymatrix, degree 3 graphical games, in which each player has …
We prove that finding an $\epsilon$-approximate Nash equilibrium is PPAD-complete for constant $\epsilon$ and a particularly simple class of games: polymatrix, degree 3 graphical games, in which each player has only two actions. As corollaries, we also prove similar inapproximability results for Bayesian Nash equilibrium in a two-player incomplete information game with a constant number of actions, for relative $\epsilon$-Well Supported Nash Equilibrium in a two-player game, for market equilibrium in a non-monotone market, for the generalized circuit problem defined by Chen, Deng, and Teng [CDT'09], and for approximate competitive equilibrium from equal incomes with indivisible goods.
We prove that finding an $\epsilon$-approximate Nash equilibrium is $\mathsf{PPAD}$--complete for constant $\epsilon$ and a particularly simple class of games: polymatrix, degree 3 graphical games, in which each player has …
We prove that finding an $\epsilon$-approximate Nash equilibrium is $\mathsf{PPAD}$--complete for constant $\epsilon$ and a particularly simple class of games: polymatrix, degree 3 graphical games, in which each player has only two actions. As corollaries, we also prove similar inapproximability results for Bayesian Nash equilibrium in a two-player incomplete information game with a constant number of actions, for relative $\epsilon$-well supported Nash equilibrium in a two-player game, for market equilibrium in a nonmonotone market, for the generalized circuit problem defined by Chen, Deng, and Teng [J. ACM, 56 (2009)], and for approximate competitive equilibrium from equal incomes with indivisible goods.
We prove that finding an ε-approximate Nash equilibrium is PPAD-complete for constant ε and a particularly simple class of games: polymatrix, degree 3 graphical games, in which each player has …
We prove that finding an ε-approximate Nash equilibrium is PPAD-complete for constant ε and a particularly simple class of games: polymatrix, degree 3 graphical games, in which each player has only two actions.
We prove that finding an $\epsilon$-approximate Nash equilibrium is PPAD-complete for constant $\epsilon$ and a particularly simple class of games: polymatrix, degree 3 graphical games, in which each player has …
We prove that finding an $\epsilon$-approximate Nash equilibrium is PPAD-complete for constant $\epsilon$ and a particularly simple class of games: polymatrix, degree 3 graphical games, in which each player has only two actions.
As corollaries, we also prove similar inapproximability results for Bayesian Nash equilibrium in a two-player incomplete information game with a constant number of actions, for relative $\epsilon$-Well Supported Nash Equilibrium in a two-player game, for market equilibrium in a non-monotone market, for the generalized circuit problem defined by Chen, Deng, and Teng [CDT'09], and for approximate competitive equilibrium from equal incomes with indivisible goods.
We introduce and analyze new envy-based fairness concepts for agents with weights that quantify their entitlements in the allocation of indivisible items. We propose two variants of weighted envy-freeness up …
We introduce and analyze new envy-based fairness concepts for agents with weights that quantify their entitlements in the allocation of indivisible items. We propose two variants of weighted envy-freeness up to one item (WEF1): strong , where envy can be eliminated by removing an item from the envied agent’s bundle, and weak , where envy can be eliminated either by removing an item (as in the strong version) or by replicating an item from the envied agent’s bundle in the envying agent’s bundle. We show that for additive valuations, an allocation that is both Pareto optimal and strongly WEF1 always exists and can be computed in pseudo-polynomial time; moreover, an allocation that maximizes the weighted Nash social welfare may not be strongly WEF1, but it always satisfies the weak version of the property. Moreover, we establish that a generalization of the round-robin picking sequence algorithm produces in polynomial time a strongly WEF1 allocation for an arbitrary number of agents; for two agents, we can efficiently achieve both strong WEF1 and Pareto optimality by adapting the adjusted winner procedure. Our work highlights several aspects in which weighted fair division is richer and more challenging than its unweighted counterpart.
In this paper, we introduce and analyze new envy-based fairness concepts for agents with weights that quantify their entitlements in the allocation of indivisible items. We propose two variants of …
In this paper, we introduce and analyze new envy-based fairness concepts for agents with weights that quantify their entitlements in the allocation of indivisible items. We propose two variants of weighted envy-freeness up to one item (WEF1) -- strong (where the envy can be eliminated by removing an item from the envied agent's bundle) and weak (where the envy can be eliminated either by removing an item as in the strong version or by replicating an item from the envied agent's bundle in the envious agent's bundle). We prove that for additive valuations, an allocation that is both Pareto optimal and strongly WEF1 always exists; however, an allocation that maximizes the weighted Nash social welfare may not be strongly WEF1 but always satisfies the weak version of the property. Moreover, we establish that a generalization of the round-robin picking sequence produces in polynomial time a strongly WEF1 allocation for an arbitrary number of agents; for two agents, we can efficiently achieve both strong WEF1 and Pareto optimality by adapting the classic adjusted winner algorithm. We also explore the connections of WEF1 with approximations to the weighted versions of two other fairness concepts: proportionality and the maximin share guarantee.
Recently Cole and Gkatzelis gave the first constant factor approximation algorithm for the problem of allocating indivisible items to agents, under additive valuations, so as to maximize the Nash Social …
Recently Cole and Gkatzelis gave the first constant factor approximation algorithm for the problem of allocating indivisible items to agents, under additive valuations, so as to maximize the Nash Social Welfare. We give constant factor algorithms for a substantial generalization of their problem -- to the case of separable, piecewise-linear concave utility functions. We give two such algorithms, the first using market equilibria and the second using the theory of stable polynomials. In AGT, there is a paucity of methods for the design of mechanisms for the allocation of indivisible goods and the result of Cole and Gkatzelis seemed to be taking a major step towards filling this gap. Our result can be seen as another step in this direction.
We consider the classic problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods among agents with additive valuation functions and explore the connection between two prominent fairness notions: maximum Nash welfare (MNW) and …
We consider the classic problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods among agents with additive valuation functions and explore the connection between two prominent fairness notions: maximum Nash welfare (MNW) and envy-freeness up to any good (EFX). We establish that an MNW allocation is always EFX as long as there are at most two possible values for the goods, whereas this implication is no longer true for three or more distinct values. As a notable consequence, this proves the existence of EFX allocations for these restricted valuation functions. While the efficient computation of an MNW allocation for two possible values remains an open problem, we present a novel algorithm for directly constructing EFX allocations in this setting. Finally, we study the question of whether an MNW allocation implies any EFX guarantee for general additive valuation functions under a natural new interpretation of approximate EFX allocations.
We consider the classic problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods among agents with additive valuation functions and explore the connection between two prominent fairness notions: maximum Nash welfare (MNW) and …
We consider the classic problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods among agents with additive valuation functions and explore the connection between two prominent fairness notions: maximum Nash welfare (MNW) and envy-freeness up to any good (EFX). We establish that an MNW allocation is always EFX as long as there are at most two possible values for the goods, whereas this implication is no longer true for three or more distinct values. As a notable consequence, this proves the existence of EFX allocations for these restricted valuation functions. While the efficient computation of an MNW allocation for two possible values remains an open problem, we present a novel algorithm for directly constructing EFX allocations in this setting. Finally, we study the question of whether an MNW allocation implies any EFX guarantee for general additive valuation functions under a natural new interpretation of approximate EFX allocations.
We investigate the fair allocation of indivisible goods to agents with possibly different entitlements represented by weights. Previous work has shown that guarantees for additive valuations with existing envy-based notions …
We investigate the fair allocation of indivisible goods to agents with possibly different entitlements represented by weights. Previous work has shown that guarantees for additive valuations with existing envy-based notions cannot be extended to the case where agents have matroid-rank (i.e., binary submodular) valuations. We propose two families of envy-based notions for matroid-rank and general submodular valuations, one based on the idea of transferability and the other on marginal values. We show that our notions can be satisfied via generalizations of rules such as picking sequences and maximum weighted Nash welfare. In addition, we introduce welfare measures based on harmonic numbers, and show that variants of maximum weighted harmonic welfare offer stronger fairness guarantees than maximum weighted Nash welfare under matroid-rank valuations.
We consider the problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods to agents with weights representing their entitlements. A natural rule in this setting is the maximum weighted Nash welfare (MWNW) rule, …
We consider the problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods to agents with weights representing their entitlements. A natural rule in this setting is the maximum weighted Nash welfare (MWNW) rule, which selects an allocation maximizing the weighted product of the agents' utilities. We show that when agents have binary valuations, a specific version of MWNW is resource- and population-monotone, satisfies group-strategyproofness, and can be implemented in polynomial time.
We study the problem of approximating maximum Nash social welfare (NSW) when allocating m indivisible items among n asymmetric agents with submodular valuations. The NSW is a well-established notion of …
We study the problem of approximating maximum Nash social welfare (NSW) when allocating m indivisible items among n asymmetric agents with submodular valuations. The NSW is a well-established notion of fairness and efficiency, defined as the weighted geometric mean of agents’ valuations. For special cases of the problem with symmetric agents and additive(-like) valuation functions, approximation algorithms have been designed using approaches customized for these specific settings, and they fail to extend to more general settings. Hence, no approximation algorithm with a factor independent of m was known either for asymmetric agents with additive valuations or for symmetric agents beyond additive(-like) valuations before this work. In this article, we extend our understanding of the NSW problem to far more general settings. Our main contribution is two approximation algorithms for asymmetric agents with additive and submodular valuations. Both algorithms are simple to understand and involve non-trivial modifications of a greedy repeated matchings approach. Allocations of high-valued items are done separately by un-matching certain items and re-matching them by different processes in both algorithms. We show that these approaches achieve approximation factors of O ( n ) and O ( n log n ) for additive and submodular cases, independent of the number of items. For additive valuations, our algorithm outputs an allocation that also achieves the fairness property of envy-free up to one item ( EF1 ). Furthermore, we show that the NSW problem under submodular valuations is strictly harder than all currently known settings with an \(\frac{\mathrm{e}}{\mathrm{e}-1}\) factor of the hardness of approximation, even for constantly many agents. For this case, we provide a different approximation algorithm that achieves a factor of \(\frac{\mathrm{e}}{\mathrm{e}-1}\) , hence resolving it completely.
We study the problem of allocating a set of indivisible goods among agents with subadditive valuations in a fair and efficient manner. Envy-Freeness up to any good (EFX) is the …
We study the problem of allocating a set of indivisible goods among agents with subadditive valuations in a fair and efficient manner. Envy-Freeness up to any good (EFX) is the most compelling notion of fairness in the context of indivisible goods. Although the existence of EFX is not known beyond the simple case of two agents with subadditive valuations, some good approximations of EFX are known to exist, namely 1/2-EFX allocation and EFX allocations with bounded charity. Nash welfare (the geometric mean of agents' valuations) is one of the most commonly used measures of efficiency. In case of additive valuations, an allocation that maximizes Nash welfare also satisfies fairness properties like Envy-Free up to one good (EF1). Although there is substantial work on approximating Nash welfare when agents have additive valuations, very little is known when agents have subadditive valuations. In this paper, we design a polynomial-time algorithm that outputs an allocation that satisfies either of the two approximations of EFX as well as achieves an O(n) approximation to the Nash welfare. Our result also improves the current best-known approximation of O(n log n) and O(m) to Nash welfare when agents have submodular and subadditive valuations, respectively. Furthermore, our technique also gives an O(n) approximation to a family of welfare measures, p-mean of valuations for p in (-\infty, 1], thereby also matching asymptotically the current best approximation ratio for special cases like p = -\infty while also retaining the remarkable fairness properties.
In the budget-feasible allocation problem, a set of items with varied sizes and values are to be allocated to a group of agents. Each agent has a budget constraint on …
In the budget-feasible allocation problem, a set of items with varied sizes and values are to be allocated to a group of agents. Each agent has a budget constraint on the total size of items she can receive. The goal is to compute a feasible allocation that is envy-free (EF), in which the agents do not envy each other for the items they receive, nor do they envy a charity, who is endowed with all the unallocated items. Since EF allocations barely exist even without budget constraints, we are interested in the relaxed notion of envy-freeness up to one item (EF1). The computation of both exact and approximate EF1 allocations remains largely open, despite a recent effort by Wu et al. (IJCAI 2021) in showing that any budget-feasible allocation that maximizes the Nash Social Welfare (NSW) is 1/4-approximate EF1. In this paper, we move one step forward by showing that for agents with identical additive valuations, a 1/2-approximate EF1 allocation can be computed in polynomial time. For the uniform-budget and two-agent cases, we propose efficient algorithms for computing an exact EF1 allocation. We also consider the large budget setting, i.e., when the item sizes are infinitesimal compared with the agents' budgets, and show that both the NSW maximizing allocation and the allocation our polynomial-time algorithm computes have an approximation close to 1 regarding EF1.
We study the Nash Social Welfare problem: Given $n$ agents with valuation functions $v_i:2^{[m]} \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$, partition $[m]$ into $S_1,\ldots,S_n$ so as to maximize $(\prod_{i=1}^{n} v_i(S_i))^{1/n}$. The problem has …
We study the Nash Social Welfare problem: Given $n$ agents with valuation functions $v_i:2^{[m]} \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$, partition $[m]$ into $S_1,\ldots,S_n$ so as to maximize $(\prod_{i=1}^{n} v_i(S_i))^{1/n}$. The problem has been shown to admit a constant-factor approximation for additive, budget-additive, and piecewise linear concave separable valuations; the case of submodular valuations is open. We provide a $\frac{1}{e} (1-\frac{1}{e})^2$-approximation of the {\em optimal value} for several classes of submodular valuations: coverage, sums of matroid rank functions, and certain matching-based valuations.
The Nash social welfare (NSW) is a well-known social welfare measurement that balances individual utilities and the overall efficiency. In the context of fair allocation of indivisible goods, it has …
The Nash social welfare (NSW) is a well-known social welfare measurement that balances individual utilities and the overall efficiency. In the context of fair allocation of indivisible goods, it has been shown by Caragiannis et al. (EC 2016 and TEAC 2019) that an allocation maximizing the NSW is envy-free up to one good (EF1). In this paper, we are interested in the fairness of the NSW in a budget-feasible allocation problem, in which each item has a cost that will be incurred to the agent it is allocated to, and each agent has a budget constraint on the total cost of items she receives. We show that a budget-feasible allocation that maximizes the NSW achieves a 1/4-approximation of EF1 and the approximation ratio is tight. The approximation ratio improves gracefully when the items have small costs compared with the agents' budgets; it converges to 1/2 when the budget-cost ratio approaches infinity.
We study the problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods and focus on the classic fairness notion of proportionality. The indivisibility of the goods is long known to pose highly non-trivial …
We study the problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods and focus on the classic fairness notion of proportionality. The indivisibility of the goods is long known to pose highly non-trivial obstacles to achieving fairness, and a very vibrant line of research has aimed to circumvent them using appropriate notions of approximate fairness. Recent work has established that even approximate versions of proportionality (PROPx) may be impossible to achieve even for small instances, while the best known achievable approximations (PROP1) are much weaker. We introduce the notion of proportionality up to the maximin item (PROPm) and show how to reach an allocation satisfying this notion for any instance involving up to five agents with additive valuations. PROPm provides a well-motivated middle-ground between PROP1 and PROPx, while also capturing some elements of the well-studied maximin share (MMS) benchmark: another relaxation of proportionality that has attracted a lot of attention.
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 …
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].
Social commerce platforms are emerging businesses where producers sell products through re-sellers who advertise the products to other customers in their social network. Due to the increasing popularity of this …
Social commerce platforms are emerging businesses where producers sell products through re-sellers who advertise the products to other customers in their social network. Due to the increasing popularity of this business model, thousands of small producers and re-sellers are starting to depend on these platforms for their livelihood; thus, it is important to provide fair earning opportunities to them. The enormous product space in such platforms prohibits manual search, and motivates the need for recommendation algorithms to effectively allocate product exposure and, consequently, earning opportunities. In this work, we focus on the fairness of such allocations in social commerce platforms and formulate the problem of assigning products to re-sellers as a fair division problem with indivisible items under two-sided cardinality constraints, wherein each product must be given to at least a certain number of re-sellers and each re-seller must get a certain number of products.
We consider the classic problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods among agents with additive valuation functions and explore the connection between two prominent fairness notions: maximum Nash welfare (MNW) and …
We consider the classic problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods among agents with additive valuation functions and explore the connection between two prominent fairness notions: maximum Nash welfare (MNW) and envy-freeness up to any good (EFX). We establish that an MNW allocation is always EFX as long as there are at most two possible values for the goods, whereas this implication is no longer true for three or more distinct values. As a notable consequence, this proves the existence of EFX allocations for these restricted valuation functions. While the efficient computation of an MNW allocation for two possible values remains an open problem, we present a novel algorithm for directly constructing EFX allocations in this setting. Finally, we study the question of whether an MNW allocation implies any EFX guarantee for general additive valuation functions under a natural new interpretation of approximate EFX allocations.
We consider the problem of allocating a set on indivisible items to players with private preferences in an efficient and fair way. We focus on valuations that have dichotomous marginals, …
We consider the problem of allocating a set on indivisible items to players with private preferences in an efficient and fair way. We focus on valuations that have dichotomous marginals, in which the added value of any item to a set is either 0 or 1, and aim to design truthful allocation mechanisms (without money) that maximize welfare and are fair. For the case that players have submodular valuations with dichotomous marginals, we design such a deterministic truthful allocation mechanism. The allocation output by our mechanism is Lorenz dominating, and consequently satisfies many desired fairness properties, such as being envy-free up to any item (EFX), and maximizing the Nash Social Welfare (NSW). We then show that our mechanism with random priorities is envy-free ex-ante, while having all the above properties ex-post. Furthermore, we present several impossibility results precluding similar results for the larger class of XOS valuations.
To gauge the robustness of our positive results, we also study $\epsilon$-dichotomous valuations, in which the added value of any item to a set is either non-positive, or in the range $[1, 1 + \epsilon]$. We show several impossibility results in this setting, and also a positive result: for players that have additive $\epsilon$-dichotomous valuations with sufficiently small $\epsilon$, we design a randomized truthful mechanism with strong ex-post guarantees. For $\rho = \frac{1}{1 + \epsilon}$, the allocations that it produces generate at least a $\rho$-fraction of the maximum welfare, and enjoy $\rho$-approximations for various fairness properties, such as being envy-free up to one item (EF1), and giving each player at least her maximin share.
Envy freeness is one of the most widely studied notions in fair division. Because envy-free allocations do not always exist when items are indivisible, several relaxations have been considered. Among …
Envy freeness is one of the most widely studied notions in fair division. Because envy-free allocations do not always exist when items are indivisible, several relaxations have been considered. Among them, possibly the most compelling notion is envy freeness up to any item (EFX). Informally speaking, EFX requires that no agent i envies another agent j after the removal of any item in j’s bundle. The existence of EFX allocations is a major open problem. We study the existence of EFX allocations when agents have general valuations. For general valuations, it is known that an EFX allocation always exists (i) when n = 2 or (ii) when all agents have identical valuations, where n is the number of agents. It is also known that an EFX allocation always exists when one can leave at most n − 1 items unallocated. We develop new techniques and extend some results of additive valuations to general valuations on the existence of EFX allocations. We show that an EFX allocation always exists (i) when all agents have one of two general valuations or (ii) when the number of items is at most n + 3. We also show that an EFX allocation always exists when one can leave at most n − 2 items unallocated. In addition to the positive results, we construct an instance with n = 3, in which an existing approach does not work. Funding: This work was partially supported by Kyoto University and Toyota Motor Corporation [Joint Project “Advanced Mathematical Science for Mobility Society”].
We study the problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods among agents with additive valuations. The extent of fairness of an allocation is measured by its Nash social …
We study the problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods among agents with additive valuations. The extent of fairness of an allocation is measured by its Nash social welfare, which is the geometric mean of the valuations of the agents for their bundles. While the problem of maximizing Nash social welfare is known to be APX-hard in general, we study the effectiveness of simple, greedy algorithms in solving this problem in two interesting special cases. First, we show that a simple, greedy algorithm provides a 1.061-approximation guarantee when agents have identical valuations, even though the problem of maximizing Nash social welfare remains NP-hard for this setting. Second, we show that when agents have binary valuations over the goods, an exact solution (i.e., a Nash optimal allocation) can be found in polynomial time via a greedy algorithm. Our results in the binary setting extend to provide novel, exact algorithms for optimizing Nash social welfare under concave valuations. Notably, for the above mentioned scenarios, our techniques provide a simple alternative to several of the existing, more sophisticated techniques for this problem such as constructing equilibria of Fisher markets or using real stable polynomials.
We present a 380-approximation algorithm for the Nash Social Welfare problem with submodular valuations. Our algorithm builds on and extends a recent constant-factor approximation for Rado valuations [15].
We present a 380-approximation algorithm for the Nash Social Welfare problem with submodular valuations. Our algorithm builds on and extends a recent constant-factor approximation for Rado valuations [15].
A mixed manna contains goods (that everyone likes), bads (that everyone dislikes), as well as items that are goods to some agents, but bads or satiated to others. If all …
A mixed manna contains goods (that everyone likes), bads (that everyone dislikes), as well as items that are goods to some agents, but bads or satiated to others. If all items are goods and utility functions are homothetic, concave (and monotone), the Competitive Equilibrium with Equal Incomes maximizes the Nash product of utilities: hence it is welfarist (determined utility-wise by the feasible set of profiles), single-valued and easy to compute.
We consider the problem of allocating a set of divisible goods to $N$ agents in an online manner, aiming to maximize the Nash social welfare, a widely studied objective which …
We consider the problem of allocating a set of divisible goods to $N$ agents in an online manner, aiming to maximize the Nash social welfare, a widely studied objective which provides a balance between fairness and efficiency. The goods arrive in a sequence of $T$ periods and the value of each agent for a good is adversarially chosen when the good arrives. We first observe that no online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio better than the trivial $O(N)$, unless it is given additional information about the agents' values. Then, in line with the emerging area of "algorithms with predictions", we consider a setting where for each agent, the online algorithm is only given a prediction of her monopolist utility, i.e., her utility if all goods were given to her alone (corresponding to the sum of her values over the $T$ periods). Our main result is an online algorithm whose competitive ratio is parameterized by the multiplicative errors in these predictions. The algorithm achieves a competitive ratio of $O(\log N)$ and $O(\log T)$ if the predictions are perfectly accurate. Moreover, the competitive ratio degrades smoothly with the errors in the predictions, and is surprisingly robust: the logarithmic competitive ratio holds even if the predictions are very inaccurate. We complement this positive result by showing that our bounds are essentially tight: no online algorithm, even if provided with perfectly accurate predictions, can achieve a competitive ratio of $O(\log^{1-\epsilon} N)$ or $O(\log^{1-\epsilon} T)$ for any constant $\epsilon>0$.
For any >0, we give a simple, deterministic (4+)-approximation algorithm for the Nash social welfare (NSW) problem under submodular valuations. The previous best approximation factor was 380 via a randomized …
For any >0, we give a simple, deterministic (4+)-approximation algorithm for the Nash social welfare (NSW) problem under submodular valuations. The previous best approximation factor was 380 via a randomized algorithm. We also consider the asymmetric variant of the problem, where the objective is to maximize the weighted geometric mean of agents' valuations, and give an (ω + 2 + ) -approximation if the ratio between the largest weight and the average weight is at most ω.
We study the problem of allocating a set of indivisible goods among a set of agents in a fair and efficient manner. An allocation is said to be fair if …
We study the problem of allocating a set of indivisible goods among a set of agents in a fair and efficient manner. An allocation is said to be fair if it is envy-free up to one good (EF1), which means that each agent prefers its own bundle over the bundle of any other agent up to the removal of one good. In addition, an allocation is deemed efficient if it satisfies Pareto efficiency. While each of these well-studied properties is easy to achieve separately, achieving them together is far from obvious. Recently, Caragiannis et al. (2016) established the surprising result that when agents have additive valuations for the goods, there always exists an allocation that simultaneously satisfies these two seemingly incompatible properties. Specifically, they showed that an allocation that maximizes the Nash social welfare objective is both EF1 and Pareto efficient. However, the problem of maximizing Nash social welfare is NP-hard. As a result, this approach does not provide an efficient algorithm for finding a fair and efficient allocation. In this paper, we bypass this barrier, and develop a pseudopolynomial time algorithm for finding allocations that are EF1 and Pareto efficient; in particular, when the valuations are bounded, our algorithm finds such an allocation in polynomial time. Furthermore, we establish a stronger existence result compared to Caragiannis et al. (2016): For additive valuations, there always exists an allocation that is EF1 and fractionally Pareto efficient. Another key contribution of our work is to show that our algorithm provides a polynomial-time 1.45-approximation to the Nash social welfare objective. This improves upon the best known approximation ratio for this problem (namely, the 2-approximation algorithm of Cole et al., 2017), and also matches the lower bound on the integrality gap of the convex program of Cole et al. (2017). Unlike many of the existing approaches, our algorithm is completely combinatorial, and relies on constructing integral Fisher markets wherein specific equilibria are not only efficient, but also fair.
Several fairness concepts have been proposed recently in attempts to approximate envy-freeness in settings with indivisible goods. Among them, the concept of envy-freeness up to any item (EFX) is arguably …
Several fairness concepts have been proposed recently in attempts to approximate envy-freeness in settings with indivisible goods. Among them, the concept of envy-freeness up to any item (EFX) is arguably the closest to envy-freeness. Unfortunately, EFX allocations are not known to exist except in a few special cases. We make significant progress in this direction. We show that for every instance with additive valuations, there is an EFX allocation of a subset of items with a Nash welfare that is at least half of the maximum possible Nash welfare for the original set of items. That is, after donating some items to a charity, one can distribute the remaining items in a fair way with high efficiency. This bound is proved to be best possible. Our proof is constructive and highlights the importance of maximum Nash welfare allocation. Starting with such an allocation, our algorithm decides which items to donate and redistributes the initial bundles to the agents, eventually obtaining an allocation with the claimed efficiency guarantee. The application of our algorithm to large markets, where the valuations of an agent for every item is relatively small, yields EFX with almost optimal Nash welfare. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first use of large market assumptions in the fair division literature. We also show that our algorithm can be modified to compute, in polynomial-time, EFX allocations that approximate optimal Nash welfare within a factor of at most $2\rho$, using a $\rho$-approximate allocation on input instead of the maximum Nash welfare one.
We study the classic problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods among a group of agents, and focus on the notion of approximate proportionality known as PROPm. Prior …
We study the classic problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods among a group of agents, and focus on the notion of approximate proportionality known as PROPm. Prior work showed that there exists an allocation that satisfies this notion of fairness for instances involving up to five agents, but fell short of proving that this is true in general. We extend this result to show that a PROPm allocation is guaranteed to exist for all instances, independent of the number of agents or goods. Our proof is constructive, providing an algorithm that computes such an allocation and, unlike prior work, the running time of this algorithm is polynomial in both the number of agents and the number of goods.
We study the classic problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods among a group of agents, and focus on the notion of approximate proportionality known as PROPm. Prior …
We study the classic problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods among a group of agents, and focus on the notion of approximate proportionality known as PROPm. Prior work showed that there exists an allocation that satisfies this notion of fairness for instances involving up to five agents, but fell short of proving that this is true in general. We extend this result to show that a PROPm allocation is guaranteed to exist for all instances, independent of the number of agents or goods. Our proof is constructive, providing an algorithm that computes such an allocation and, unlike prior work, the running time of this algorithm is polynomial in both the number of agents and the number of goods.
We study an online allocation problem with sequentially arriving items and adversarially chosen agent values, with the goal of balancing fairness and efficiency. Our goal is to study the performance …
We study an online allocation problem with sequentially arriving items and adversarially chosen agent values, with the goal of balancing fairness and efficiency. Our goal is to study the performance of algorithms that achieve strong guarantees under other input models such as stochastic inputs, in order to achieve robust guarantees against a variety of inputs. To that end, we study the PACE (Pacing According to Current Estimated utility) algorithm, an existing algorithm designed for stochastic input. We show that in the equal-budgets case, PACE is equivalent to an integral greedy algorithm. We go on to show that with natural restrictions on the adversarial input model, both the greedy allocation and PACE have asymptotically bounded multiplicative envy as well as competitive ratio for Nash welfare, with the multiplicative factors either constant or with optimal order dependence on the number of agents. This completes a "best-of-many-worlds" guarantee for PACE, since past work showed that PACE achieves guarantees for stationary and stochastic-but-non-stationary input models.
The maximum Nash social welfare (NSW)---which maximizes the geometric mean of agents' utilities---is a fundamental solution concept with remarkable fairness and efficiency guarantees. The computational aspects of NSW have been …
The maximum Nash social welfare (NSW)---which maximizes the geometric mean of agents' utilities---is a fundamental solution concept with remarkable fairness and efficiency guarantees. The computational aspects of NSW have been extensively studied for *one-sided* preferences where a set of agents have preferences over a set of resources. Our work deviates from this trend and studies NSW maximization for *two-sided* preferences, wherein a set of workers and firms, each having a cardinal valuation function, are matched with each other. We provide a systematic study of the computational complexity of maximizing NSW for many-to-one matchings under two-sided preferences. Our main negative result is that maximizing NSW is NP-hard even in a highly restricted setting where each firm has capacity 2, all valuations are in the range {0,1,2}, and each agent positively values at most three other agents. In search of positive results, we develop approximation algorithms as well as parameterized algorithms in terms of natural parameters such as the number of workers, the number of firms, and the firms' capacities. We also provide algorithms for restricted domains such as symmetric binary valuations and bounded degree instances.
We propose a multi-agent variant of the classical multi-armed bandit problem, in which there are $N$ agents and $K$ arms, and pulling an arm generates a (possibly different) stochastic reward …
We propose a multi-agent variant of the classical multi-armed bandit problem, in which there are $N$ agents and $K$ arms, and pulling an arm generates a (possibly different) stochastic reward for each agent. Unlike the classical multi-armed bandit problem, the goal is not to learn the "best arm"; indeed, each agent may perceive a different arm to be the best for her personally. Instead, we seek to learn a fair distribution over the arms. Drawing on a long line of research in economics and computer science, we use the Nash social welfare as our notion of fairness. We design multi-agent variants of three classic multi-armed bandit algorithms and show that they achieve sublinear regret, which is now measured in terms of the lost Nash social welfare.
We study the problem of maximizing the geometric mean of $d$ low-degree non-negative forms on the real or complex sphere in $n$ variables. We show that this highly non-convex problem …
We study the problem of maximizing the geometric mean of $d$ low-degree non-negative forms on the real or complex sphere in $n$ variables. We show that this highly non-convex problem is NP-hard even when the forms are quadratic and is equivalent to optimizing a homogeneous polynomial of degree $O(d)$ on the sphere. The standard Sum-of-Squares based convex relaxation for this polynomial optimization problem requires solving a semidefinite program (SDP) of size $n^{O(d)}$, with multiplicative approximation guarantees of $Ω(\frac{1}{n})$. We exploit the compact representation of this polynomial to introduce a SDP relaxation of size polynomial in $n$ and $d$, and prove that it achieves a constant factor multiplicative approximation when maximizing the geometric mean of non-negative quadratic forms. We also show that this analysis is asymptotically tight, with a sequence of instances where the gap between the relaxation and true optimum approaches this constant factor as $d \rightarrow \infty$. Next we propose a series of intermediate relaxations of increasing complexity that interpolate to the full Sum-of-Squares relaxation, as well as a rounding algorithm that finds an approximate solution from the solution of any intermediate relaxation. Finally we show that this approach can be generalized for relaxations of products of non-negative forms of any degree.
Recommender systems play an increasingly crucial role in shaping people's opportunities, particularly in online dating platforms. It is essential from the user's perspective to increase the probability of matching with …
Recommender systems play an increasingly crucial role in shaping people's opportunities, particularly in online dating platforms. It is essential from the user's perspective to increase the probability of matching with a suitable partner while ensuring an appropriate level of fairness in the matching opportunities.
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 …
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 $e^{1/{e}} \approx 1.445$. The computed allocation is Pareto-optimal and approximates envy-freeness up to one item up to a factor of $2 + \eps$
We develop polynomial-time algorithms for the fair and efficient allocation of indivisible goods among $n$ agents that have subadditive valuations over the goods. We first consider the Nash social welfare …
We develop polynomial-time algorithms for the fair and efficient allocation of indivisible goods among $n$ agents that have subadditive valuations over the goods. We first consider the Nash social welfare as our objective and design a polynomial-time algorithm that, in the value oracle model, finds an $8n$-approximation to the Nash optimal allocation. Subadditive valuations include XOS (fractionally subadditive) and submodular valuations as special cases. Our result, even for the special case of submodular valuations, improves upon the previously best known $O(n \log n)$-approximation ratio of Garg et al. (2020).
More generally, we study maximization of $p$-mean welfare. The $p$-mean welfare is parameterized by an exponent term $p \in (-\infty, 1]$ and encompasses a range of welfare functions, such as social welfare ($p = 1$), Nash social welfare ($p \to 0$), and egalitarian welfare ($p \to -\infty$). We give an algorithm that, for subadditive valuations and any given $p \in (-\infty, 1]$, computes (in the value oracle model and in polynomial time) an allocation with $p$-mean welfare at least $\frac{1}{8n}$ times the optimal.
Further, we show that our approximation guarantees are essentially tight for XOS and, hence, subadditive valuations. We adapt a result of Dobzinski et al. (2010) to show that, under XOS valuations, an $O \left(n^{1-\varepsilon} \right)$ approximation for the $p$-mean welfare for any $p \in (-\infty,1]$ (including the Nash social welfare) requires exponentially many value queries; here, $\varepsilon>0$ is any fixed constant.
We study the problem of allocating indivisible goods among agents in a fair and economically efficient manner. In this context, the Nash social welfare--defined as the geometric mean of agents' …
We study the problem of allocating indivisible goods among agents in a fair and economically efficient manner. In this context, the Nash social welfare--defined as the geometric mean of agents' valuations for their assigned bundles--stands as a fundamental measure that quantifies the extent of fairness of an allocation. Focusing on instances in which the agents' valuations have binary marginals, we develop essentially tight results for (approximately) maximizing Nash social welfare under two of the most general classes of complement-free valuations, i.e., under binary XOS and binary subadditive valuations.
For binary XOS valuations, we develop a polynomial-time algorithm that finds a constant-factor (specifically 288) approximation for the optimal Nash social welfare, in the standard value-oracle model. The allocations computed by our algorithm also achieve constant-factor approximation for social welfare and the groupwise maximin share guarantee. These results imply that--in the case of binary XOS valuations--there necessarily exists an allocation that simultaneously satisfies multiple (approximate) fairness and efficiency criteria. We complement the algorithmic result by proving that Nash social welfare maximization is APX-hard under binary XOS valuations.
Furthermore, this work establishes an interesting separation between the binary XOS and binary subadditive settings. In particular, we prove that an exponential number of value queries are necessarily required to obtain even a sub-linear approximation for Nash social welfare under binary subadditive valuations.
Envy-freeness and Pareto Efficiency are two major goals in welfare economics. The existence of an allocation that satisfies both conditions has been studied for a long time. Whether items are …
Envy-freeness and Pareto Efficiency are two major goals in welfare economics. The existence of an allocation that satisfies both conditions has been studied for a long time. Whether items are indivisible or divisible, it is impossible to achieve envy-freeness and Pareto Efficiency ex post even in the case of two people and two items. In contrast, in this work, we prove that, for any cardinal utility functions (including complementary utilities for example) and for any number of items and players, there always exists an ex ante mixed allocation which is envy-free and Pareto Efficient, assuming the allowable assignments are closed under swaps, i.e. if given a legal assignment, swapping any two players' allocations produces another legal assignment. The problem remains open in the divisible case. We also investigate the communication complexity for finding a Pareto Efficient and envy-free allocation.
We study Fisher markets and the problem of maximizing the Nash social welfare (NSW), and show several closely related new results. In particular, we obtain: -- A new integer program …
We study Fisher markets and the problem of maximizing the Nash social welfare (NSW), and show several closely related new results. In particular, we obtain:
-- A new integer program for the NSW maximization problem whose fractional relaxation has a bounded integrality gap. In contrast, the natural integer program has an unbounded integrality gap.
-- An improved, and tight, factor 2 analysis of the algorithm of [7]; in turn showing that the integrality gap of the above relaxation is at most 2. The approximation factor shown by [7] was $2e^{1/e} \approx 2.89$.
-- A lower bound of $e^{1/e}\approx 1.44$ on the integrality gap of this relaxation.
-- New convex programs for natural generalizations of linear Fisher markets and proofs that these markets admit rational equilibria.
These results were obtained by establishing connections between previously known disparate results, and they help uncover their mathematical underpinnings. We show a formal connection between the convex programs of Eisenberg and Gale and that of Shmyrev, namely that their duals are equivalent up to a change of variables. Both programs capture equilibria of linear Fisher markets. By adding suitable constraints to Shmyrev's program, we obtain a convex program that captures equilibria of the spending-restricted market model defined by [7] in the context of the NSW maximization problem. Further, adding certain integral constraints to this program we get the integer program for the NSW mentioned above.
The basic tool we use is convex programming duality. In the special case of convex programs with linear constraints (but convex objectives), we show a particularly simple way of obtaining dual programs, putting it almost at par with linear program duality. This simple way of finding duals has been used subsequently for many other applications.
We study fair allocation of indivisible public goods subject to cardinality (budget) constraints. In this model, we have n agents and m available public goods, and we want to select …
We study fair allocation of indivisible public goods subject to cardinality (budget) constraints. In this model, we have n agents and m available public goods, and we want to select $k \leq m$ goods in a fair and efficient manner. We first establish fundamental connections between the models of private goods, public goods, and public decision making by presenting polynomial-time reductions for the popular solution concepts of maximum Nash welfare (MNW) and leximin. These mechanisms are known to provide remarkable fairness and efficiency guarantees in private goods and public decision making settings. We show that they retain these desirable properties even in the public goods case. We prove that MNW allocations provide fairness guarantees of Proportionality up to one good (Prop1), $1/n$ approximation to Round Robin Share (RRS), and the efficiency guarantee of Pareto Optimality (PO). Further, we show that the problems of finding MNW or leximin-optimal allocations are NP-hard, even in the case of constantly many agents, or binary valuations. This is in sharp contrast to the private goods setting that admits polynomial-time algorithms under binary valuations. We also design pseudo-polynomial time algorithms for computing an exact MNW or leximin-optimal allocation for the cases of (i) constantly many agents, and (ii) constantly many goods with additive valuations. We also present an O(n)-factor approximation algorithm for MNW which also satisfies RRS, Prop1, and 1/2-Prop.
We study the problem of allocating indivisible goods among $n$ agents with the objective of maximizing Nash social welfare (NSW). This welfare function is defined as the geometric mean of …
We study the problem of allocating indivisible goods among $n$ agents with the objective of maximizing Nash social welfare (NSW). This welfare function is defined as the geometric mean of the agents' valuations and, hence, it strikes a balance between the extremes of social welfare (arithmetic mean) and egalitarian welfare (max-min value). Nash social welfare has been extensively studied in recent years for various valuation classes. In particular, a notable negative result is known when the agents' valuations are complement-free and are specified via value queries: for XOS valuations, one necessarily requires exponentially many value queries to find any sublinear (in $n$) approximation for NSW. Indeed, this lower bound implies that stronger query models are needed for finding better approximations. Towards this, we utilize demand oracles and XOS oracles; both of these query models are standard and have been used in prior work on social welfare maximization with XOS valuations.
We develop the first sublinear approximation algorithm for maximizing Nash social welfare under XOS valuations, specified via demand and XOS oracles. Hence, this work breaks the $O(n)$-approximation barrier for NSW maximization under XOS valuations. We obtain this result by developing a novel connection between NSW and social welfare under a capped version of the agents' valuations. In addition to this insight, which might be of independent interest, this work relies on an intricate combination of multiple technical ideas, including the use of repeated matchings and the discrete moving knife method.
We study the problem of distributing a set of indivisible items among agents with additive valuations in a $\mathit{fair}$ manner. The fairness notion under consideration is Envy-freeness up to any …
We study the problem of distributing a set of indivisible items among agents with additive valuations in a $\mathit{fair}$ manner. The fairness notion under consideration is Envy-freeness up to any item (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 paper, we show constructively that an EFX allocation always exists for three agents. Furthermore, we falsify the conjecture by Caragiannis et al. by showing an instance with three agents for which there is a partial EFX allocation (some items are not allocated) with higher Nash welfare than that of any complete EFX allocation.
The Competitive Equilibrium with Equal Incomes is an especially appealing efficient and envy-free division of private goods when utilities are additive: it maximizes the Nash product of utilities and is …
The Competitive Equilibrium with Equal Incomes is an especially appealing efficient and envy-free division of private goods when utilities are additive: it maximizes the Nash product of utilities and is single-valued and continuous in the marginal rates of substitution. The CEEI to divide bads captures similarly the critical points of the Nash product in the efficient frontier. But it is far from resolute, allowing routinely many divisions with sharply different welfare consequences.
We study the problem of allocating a set of indivisible items to agents with additive utilities to maximize the Nash social welfare. Cole and Gkatzelis recently proved that this problem …
We study the problem of allocating a set of indivisible items to agents with additive utilities to maximize the Nash social welfare. Cole and Gkatzelis recently proved that this problem admits a constant factor approximation. We complement their result by showing that this problem is APX-hard.
We study Fisher markets and the problem of maximizing the Nash social welfare (NSW), and show several closely related new results. In particular, we obtain: -- A new integer program …
We study Fisher markets and the problem of maximizing the Nash social welfare (NSW), and show several closely related new results. In particular, we obtain:
-- A new integer program for the NSW maximization problem whose fractional relaxation has a bounded integrality gap. In contrast, the natural integer program has an unbounded integrality gap.
-- An improved, and tight, factor 2 analysis of the algorithm of [7]; in turn showing that the integrality gap of the above relaxation is at most 2. The approximation factor shown by [7] was $2e^{1/e} \approx 2.89$.
-- A lower bound of $e^{1/e}\approx 1.44$ on the integrality gap of this relaxation.
-- New convex programs for natural generalizations of linear Fisher markets and proofs that these markets admit rational equilibria.
These results were obtained by establishing connections between previously known disparate results, and they help uncover their mathematical underpinnings. We show a formal connection between the convex programs of Eisenberg and Gale and that of Shmyrev, namely that their duals are equivalent up to a change of variables. Both programs capture equilibria of linear Fisher markets. By adding suitable constraints to Shmyrev's program, we obtain a convex program that captures equilibria of the spending-restricted market model defined by [7] in the context of the NSW maximization problem. Further, adding certain integral constraints to this program we get the integer program for the NSW mentioned above.
The basic tool we use is convex programming duality. In the special case of convex programs with linear constraints (but convex objectives), we show a particularly simple way of obtaining dual programs, putting it almost at par with linear program duality. This simple way of finding duals has been used subsequently for many other applications.