arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2407.13634cs.GT
收藏

分配不可分割物品的诚实和近于嫉妒自由机制:随机性的力量

Truthful and Almost Envy-Free Mechanism of Allocating Indivisible Goods: the Power of Randomness

Xiaolin Bu, Biaoshuai Tao

AI总结:

本文提出了一种随机机制,用于在保证公平性和效率的前提下分配不可分割物品,针对不同数量的代理人设计了不同的诚实机制,实现了EF1和帕累托最优。

摘要:

我们研究了公平且诚实分配m个不可分割物品给n个代理人的问题,其中代理人具有加性偏好。具体来说,我们考虑输出满足EF$^{+u}_{-v}$的诚实机制,其中在EF$^{+u}_{-v}$分配中,对于任何代理人i和j,如果i的包中增加了u个物品,j的包中移除了v个物品,i就不会嫉妒j。先前的工作表明,当限制在确定性机制时,诚实将导致公平性的保证较差:即使有两个代理人,对于任何u和v,当物品数量足够大时,无法通过诚实机制保证EF$^{+u}_{-v}$。在本工作中,我们关注随机机制,其中我们考虑事前诚实和事后公平。对于两个代理人,我们提出一个诚实机制,实现EF$^{+0}_{-1}$(即已研究的公平观念EF1)。对于三个代理人,我们提出一个诚实机制,实现EF$^{+1}_{-1}$。对于一般n个代理人,我们证明存在一个诚实机制,实现EF$^{+0}_{-O(\sqrt{n})}$。在负面方面,当考虑更强的观念EF$_{-v}^{+u}$X时,我们证明它无法通过任何随机诚实机制实现,无论u、v如何,以及无论代理人数量固定。我们进一步考虑同时满足标准效率保证(帕累托最优)的公平和诚实机制。我们提供一个机制,同时实现诚实、EF1和帕累托最优,适用于二值化效用(即每个物品的估值为p或q,其中p>q≥0)。对于三值化效用(即每个物品的估值属于{p,q,r},其中p>q>r≥0)和任何u、v,我们证明诚实与EF$^{+u}_{-v}$和帕累托最优在两个代理人的情况下是不兼容的。

英文摘要:

We study the problem of fairly and truthfully allocating $m$ indivisible items to $n$ agents with additive preferences. Specifically, we consider truthful mechanisms outputting allocations that satisfy EF$^{+u}_{-v}$, where, in an EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ allocation, for any pair of agents $i$ and $j$, agent $i$ will not envy agent $j$ if $u$ items were added to $i$'s bundle and $v$ items were removed from $j$'s bundle. Previous work easily indicates that, when restricted to deterministic mechanisms, truthfulness will lead to a poor guarantee of fairness: even with two agents, for any $u$ and $v$, EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ cannot be guaranteed by truthful mechanisms when the number of items is large enough. In this work, we focus on randomized mechanisms, where we consider ex-ante truthfulness and ex-post fairness. For two agents, we present a truthful mechanism that achieves EF$^{+0}_{-1}$ (i.e., the well-studied fairness notion EF$1$). For three agents, we present a truthful mechanism that achieves EF$^{+1}_{-1}$. For $n$ agents in general, we show that there exists a truthful mechanism that achieves EF$^{+0}_{-O(\sqrt{n})}$. On the negative side, when considering the stronger notion EF$_{-v}^{+u}$X, we show that it cannot be achieved by any randomized truthful mechanism for any $u, v$, and any fixed number of agents. We further consider fair and truthful mechanisms that also satisfy the standard efficiency guarantee: Pareto-optimality. We provide a mechanism that simultaneously achieves truthfulness, EF$1$, and Pareto-optimality for bi-valued utilities (where agents' valuation on each item is either $p$ or $q$ for some $p>q\geq0$). For tri-valued utilities (where agents' valuations on each item belong to $\{p,q,r\}$ for some $p>q>r\geq0$) and any $u,v$, we show that truthfulness is incompatible with EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ and Pareto-optimality even for two agents.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑