Showing papers in "arXiv: Computer Science and Game Theory in 2009"

On the Power of Randomization in Algorithmic Mechanism Design

Abstract: In many settings the power of truthful mechanisms is severely bounded. In this paper we use randomization to overcome this problem. In particular, we construct an FPTAS for multi-unit auctions that is truthful in expectation, whereas there is evidence that no polynomial-time truthful deterministic mechanism provides an approximation ratio better than 2. We also show for the first time that truthful in expectation polynomial-time mechanisms are \emph{provably} stronger than polynomial-time universally truthful mechanisms. Specifically, we show that there is a setting in which: (1) there is a non-polynomial time truthful mechanism that always outputs the optimal solution, and that (2) no universally truthful randomized mechanism can provide an approximation ratio better than 2 in polynomial time, but (3) an FPTAS that is truthful in expectation exists.

Budget Constrained Auctions with Heterogeneous Items

Abstract: In this paper, we present the first approximation algorithms for the problem of designing revenue optimal Bayesian incentive compatible auctions when there are multiple (heterogeneous) items and when bidders can have arbitrary demand and budget constraints. Our mechanisms are surprisingly simple: We show that a sequential all-pay mechanism is a 4 approximation to the revenue of the optimal ex-interim truthful mechanism with discrete correlated type space for each bidder. We also show that a sequential posted price mechanism is a O(1) approximation to the revenue of the optimal ex-post truthful mechanism when the type space of each bidder is a product distribution that satisfies the standard hazard rate condition. We further show a logarithmic approximation when the hazard rate condition is removed, and complete the picture by showing that achieving a sub-logarithmic approximation, even for regular distributions and one bidder, requires pricing bundles of items. Our results are based on formulating novel LP relaxations for these problems, and developing generic rounding schemes from first principles. We believe this approach will be useful in other Bayesian mechanism design contexts.

Price of Anarchy for Greedy Auctions

Abstract: We consider auctions in which greedy algorithms, paired with first-price or critical-price payment rules, are used to resolve multi-parameter combinatorial allocation problems. We study the price of anarchy for social welfare in such auctions. We show for a variety of equilibrium concepts, including Bayes-Nash equilibrium and correlated equilibrium, the resulting price of anarchy bound is close to the approximation factor of the underlying greedy algorithm.

Pricing Randomized Allocations

Abstract: Randomized mechanisms, which map a set of bids to a probability distribution over outcomes rather than a single outcome, are an important but ill-understood area of computational mechanism design. We investigate the role of randomized outcomes (henceforth, "lotteries") in the context of a fundamental and archetypical multi-parameter mechanism design problem: selling heterogeneous items to unit-demand bidders. To what extent can a seller improve her revenue by pricing lotteries rather than items, and does this modification of the problem affect its computational tractability? Our results show that the answers to these questions hinge on whether consumers can purchase only one lottery (the buy-one model) or purchase any set of lotteries and receive an independent sample from each (the buy-many model). In the buy-one model, there is a polynomial-time algorithm to compute the revenue-maximizing envy-free prices (thus overcoming the inapproximability of the corresponding item pricing problem) and the revenue of the optimal lottery system can exceed the revenue of the optimal item pricing by an unbounded factor as long as the number of item types exceeds 4. In the buy-many model with n item types, the profit achieved by lottery pricing can exceed item pricing by a factor of O(log n) but not more, and optimal lottery pricing cannot be approximated within a factor of O(n^eps) for some eps>0, unless NP has subexponential-time randomized algorithms. Our lower bounds rely on a mixture of geometric and algebraic techniques, whereas the upper bounds use a novel rounding scheme to transform a mechanism with randomized outcomes into one with deterministic outcomes while losing only a bounded amount of revenue.

Sum of Us: Strategyproof Selection from the Selectors

Abstract: We consider directed graphs over a set of n agents, where an edge (i,j) is taken to mean that agent i supports or trusts agent j. Given such a graph and an integer k\leq n, we wish to select a subset of k agents that maximizes the sum of indegrees, i.e., a subset of k most popular or most trusted agents. At the same time we assume that each individual agent is only interested in being selected, and may misreport its outgoing edges to this end. This problem formulation captures realistic scenarios where agents choose among themselves, which can be found in the context of Internet search, social networks like Twitter, or reputation systems like Epinions. Our goal is to design mechanisms without payments that map each graph to a k-subset of agents to be selected and satisfy the following two constraints: strategyproofness, i.e., agents cannot benefit from misreporting their outgoing edges, and approximate optimality, i.e., the sum of indegrees of the selected subset of agents is always close to optimal. Our first main result is a surprising impossibility: for k \in {1,...,n-1}, no deterministic strategyproof mechanism can provide a finite approximation ratio. Our second main result is a randomized strategyproof mechanism with an approximation ratio that is bounded from above by four for any value of k, and approaches one as k grows.

Spending is not Easier than Trading: On the Computational Equivalence of Fisher and Arrow-Debreu Equilibria

Abstract: It is a common belief that computing a market equilibrium in Fisher's spending model is easier than computing a market equilibrium in Arrow-Debreu's exchange model. This belief is built on the fact that we have more algorithmic success in Fisher equilibria than Arrow-Debreu equilibria. For example, a Fisher equilibrium in a Leontief market can be found in polynomial time, while it is PPAD-hard to compute an approximate Arrow-Debreu equilibrium in a Leontief market. In this paper, we show that even when all the utilities are additively separable, piecewise-linear, and concave functions, finding an approximate equilibrium in Fisher's model is complete in PPAD. Our result solves a long-term open question on the complexity of market equilibria. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first PPAD-completeness result for Fisher's model.

On the Base Station Selection and Base Station Sharing in Self-Configuring Networks

Abstract: We model the interaction of several radio devices aiming to obtain wireless connectivity by using a set of base stations (BS) as a non-cooperative game. Each radio device aims to maximize its own spectral efficiency (SE) in two different scenarios: First, we let each player to use a unique BS (BS selection) and second, we let them to simultaneously use several BSs (BS Sharing). In both cases, we show that the resulting game is an exact potential game. We found that the BS selection game posses multiple Nash equilibria (NE) while the BS sharing game posses a unique one. We provide fully decentralized algorithms which always converge to a NE in both games. We analyze the price of anarchy and the price of stability for the case of BS selection. Finally, we observed that depending on the number of transmitters, the BS selection technique might provide a better global performance (network spectral efficiency) than BS sharing, which suggests the existence of a Braess type paradox.

Strategyproof Approximation Mechanisms for Location on Networks

Abstract: We consider the problem of locating a facility on a network, represented by a graph. A set of strategic agents have different ideal locations for the facility; the cost of an agent is the distance between its ideal location and the facility. A mechanism maps the locations reported by the agents to the location of the facility. Specifically, we are interested in social choice mechanisms that do not utilize payments. We wish to design mechanisms that are strategyproof, in the sense that agents can never benefit by lying, or, even better, group strategyproof, in the sense that a coalition of agents cannot all benefit by lying. At the same time, our mechanisms must provide a small approximation ratio with respect to one of two optimization targets: the social cost or the maximum cost. We give an almost complete characterization of the feasible truthful approximation ratio under both target functions, deterministic and randomized mechanisms, and with respect to different network topologies. Our main results are: We show that a simple randomized mechanism is group strategyproof and gives a (2-2/n)-approximation for the social cost, where n is the number of agents, when the network is a circle (known as a ring in the case of computer networks); we design a novel "hybrid" strategyproof randomized mechanism that provides a tight approximation ratio of 3/2 for the maximum cost when the network is a circle; and we show that no randomized SP mechanism can provide an approximation ratio better than 2-o(1) to the maximum cost even when the network is a tree, thereby matching a trivial upper bound of two.

Sequential Posted Pricing and Multi-parameter Mechanism Design

Abstract: We consider the classical mathematical economics problem of {\em Bayesian optimal mechanism design} where a principal aims to optimize expected revenue when allocating resources to self-interested agents with preferences drawn from a known distribution. In single-parameter settings (i.e., where each agent's preference is given by a single private value for being served and zero for not being served) this problem is solved [Myerson '81]. Unfortunately, these single parameter optimal mechanisms are impractical and rarely employed [Ausubel and Milgrom '06], and furthermore the underlying economic theory fails to generalize to the important, relevant, and unsolved multi-dimensional setting (i.e., where each agent's preference is given by multiple values for each of the multiple services available) [Manelli and Vincent '07]. In contrast to the theory of optimal mechanisms we develop a theory of sequential posted price mechanisms, where agents in sequence are offered take-it-or-leave-it prices. These mechanisms are approximately optimal in single-dimensional settings, and avoid many of the properties that make optimal mechanisms impractical. Furthermore, these mechanisms generalize naturally to give the first known approximations to the elusive optimal multi-dimensional mechanism design problem. In particular, we solve multi-dimensional multi-unit auction problems and generalizations to matroid feasibility constraints. The constant approximations we obtain range from 1.5 to 8. For all but one case, our posted price sequences can be computed in polynomial time.

False name manipulations in weighted voting games: splitting, merging and annexation

Abstract: An important aspect of mechanism design in social choice protocols and multiagent systems is to discourage insincere and manipulative behaviour. We examine the computational complexity of false-name manipulation in weighted voting games which are an important class of coalitional voting games. Weighted voting games have received increased interest in the multiagent community due to their compact representation and ability to model coalitional formation scenarios. Bachrach and Elkind in their AAMAS 2008 paper examined divide and conquer false-name manipulation in weighted voting games from the point of view of Shapley-Shubik index. We analyse the corresponding case of the Banzhaf index and check how much the Banzhaf index of a player increases or decreases if it splits up into sub-players. A pseudo-polynomial algorithm to find the optimal split is also provided. Bachrach and Elkind also mentioned manipulation via merging as an open problem. In the paper, we examine the cases where a player annexes other players or merges with them to increase their Banzhaf index or Shapley-Shubik index payoff. We characterize the computational complexity of such manipulations and provide limits to the manipulation. The annexation non-monotonicity paradox is also discovered in the case of the Banzhaf index. The results give insight into coalition formation and manipulation.

Alpaga: A Tool for Solving Parity Games with Imperfect Information

Abstract: Alpaga is a solver for two-player parity games with imperfect information. Given the description of a game, it determines whether the first player can ensure to win and, if so, it constructs a winning strategy. The tool provides a symbolic implementation of a recent algorithm based on antichains.

A deterministic truthful PTAS for scheduling related machines

Abstract: Scheduling on related machines ($Q||C_{\max}$) is one of the most important problems in the field of Algorithmic Mechanism Design. Each machine is controlled by a selfish agent and her valuation can be expressed via a single parameter, her {\em speed}. In contrast to other similar problems, Archer and Tardos \cite{AT01} showed that an algorithm that minimizes the makespan can be truthfully implemented, although in exponential time. On the other hand, if we leave out the game-theoretic issues, the complexity of the problem has been completely settled -- the problem is strongly NP-hard, while there exists a PTAS \cite{HS88,ES04}. This problem is the most well studied in single-parameter algorithmic mechanism design. It gives an excellent ground to explore the boundary between truthfulness and efficient computation. Since the work of Archer and Tardos, quite a lot of deterministic and randomized mechanisms have been suggested. Recently, a breakthrough result \cite{DDDR08} showed that a randomized truthful PTAS exists. On the other hand, for the deterministic case, the best known approximation factor is 2.8 \cite{Kov05,Kov07}. It has been a major open question whether there exists a deterministic truthful PTAS, or whether truthfulness has an essential, negative impact on the computational complexity of the problem. In this paper we give a definitive answer to this important question by providing a truthful {\em deterministic} PTAS.

Dynamic Conjectures in Random Access Networks Using Bio-inspired Learning

Abstract: This paper considers a conjecture-based distributed learning approach that enables autonomous nodes to independently optimize their transmission probabilities in random access networks. We model the interaction among multiple self-interested nodes as a game. It is well-known that the Nash equilibria in this game result in zero throughput for all the nodes if they take myopic best-response, thereby leading to a network collapse. This paper enables nodes to behave as intelligent entities which can proactively gather information, form internal conjectures on how their competitors would react to their actions, and update their beliefs according to their local observations. In this way, nodes are capable to autonomously "learn" the behavior of their competitors, optimize their own actions, and eventually cultivate reciprocity in the random access network. To characterize the steady-state outcome, the conjectural equilibrium is introduced. Inspired by the biological phenomena of "derivative action" and "gradient dynamics", two distributed conjecture-based action update mechanisms are proposed to stabilize the random access network. The sufficient conditions that guarantee the proposed conjecture-based learning algorithms to converge are derived. Moreover, it is shown that all the achievable operating points in the throughput region are essentially stable conjectural equilibria corresponding to different conjectures. We investigate how the conjectural equilibrium can be selected in heterogeneous networks and how the proposed methods can be extended to ad-hoc networks. Simulations verify that the system performance significantly outperforms existing protocols, such as IEEE 802.11 DCF protocol and the PMAC protocol, in terms of throughput, fairness, convergence, and stability.

Congestion games with resource reuse and applications in spectrum sharing

Abstract: In this paper we consider an extension to the classical definition of congestion games (CG) in which multiple users share the same set of resources and their payoff for using any resource is a function of the total number of users sharing it. The classical congestion games enjoy some very appealing properties, including the existence of a Nash equilibrium and that every improvement path is finite and leads to such a NE (also called the finite improvement property or FIP), which is also a local optimum to a potential function. On the other hand, this class of games does not model well the congestion or resource sharing in a wireless context, a prominent feature of which is spatial reuse. What this translates to in the context of a congestion game is that a users payoff for using a resource (interpreted as a channel) is a function of the its number of its interfering users sharing that channel, rather than the total number among all users. This makes the problem quite different. We will call this the congestion game with resource reuse (CG-RR). In this paper we study intrinsic properties of such a game; in particular, we seek to address under what conditions on the underlying network this game possesses the FIP or NE. We also discuss the implications of these results when applied to wireless spectrum sharing

The Shield that Never Was: Societies with Single-Peaked Preferences are More Open to Manipulation and Control

Abstract: Much work has been devoted, during the past twenty years, to using complexity to protect elections from manipulation and control. Many results have been obtained showing NP-hardness shields, and recently there has been much focus on whether such worst-case hardness protections can be bypassed by frequently correct heuristics or by approximations. This paper takes a very different approach: We argue that when electorates follow the canonical political science model of societal preferences the complexity shield never existed in the first place. In particular, we show that for electorates having single-peaked preferences, many existing NP-hardness results on manipulation and control evaporate.

Parametric packing of selfish items and the subset sum algorithm

Abstract: The subset sum algorithm is a natural heuristic for the classical Bin Packing problem: In each iteration, the algorithm finds among the unpacked items, a maximum size set of items that fits into a new bin. More than 35 years after its first mention in the literature, establishing the worst-case performance of this heuristic remains, surprisingly, an open problem. Due to their simplicity and intuitive appeal, greedy algorithms are the heuristics of choice of many practitioners. Therefore, better understanding simple greedy heuristics is, in general, an interesting topic in its own right. Very recently, Epstein and Kleiman (Proc. ESA 2008) provided another incentive to study the subset sum algorithm by showing that the Strong Price of Anarchy of the game theoretic version of the bin-packing problem is precisely the approximation ratio of this heuristic. In this paper we establish the exact approximation ratio of the subset sum algorithm, thus settling a long standing open problem. We generalize this result to the parametric variant of the bin packing problem where item sizes lie on the interval (0,\alpha] for some \alpha \leq 1, yielding tight bounds for the Strong Price of Anarchy for all \alpha \leq 1. Finally, we study the pure Price of Anarchy of the parametric Bin Packing game for which we show nearly tight upper and lower bounds for all \alpha \leq 1.

The Complexity of Nash Equilibria in Simple Stochastic Multiplayer Games

Abstract: We analyse the computational complexity of finding Nash equilibria in simple stochastic multiplayer games. We show that restricting the search space to equilibria whose payoffs fall into a certain interval may lead to undecidability. In particular, we prove that the following problem is undecidable: Given a game G, does there exist a pure-strategy Nash equilibrium of G where player 0 wins with probability 1. Moreover, this problem remains undecidable if it is restricted to strategies with (unbounded) finite memory. However, if mixed strategies are allowed, decidability remains an open problem. One way to obtain a provably decidable variant of the problem is restricting the strategies to be positional or stationary. For the complexity of these two problems, we obtain a common lower bound of NP and upper bounds of NP and PSPACE respectively.

Quasi-Proportional Mechanisms: Prior-free Revenue Maximization

Abstract: Inspired by Internet ad auction applications, we study the problem of allocating a single item via an auction when bidders place very different values on the item. We formulate this as the problem of prior-free auction and focus on designing a simple mechanism that always allocates the item. Rather than designing sophisticated pricing methods like prior literature, we design better allocation methods. In particular, we propose quasi-proportional allocation methods in which the probability that an item is allocated to a bidder depends (quasi-proportionally) on the bids. We prove that corresponding games for both all-pay and winners-pay quasi-proportional mechanisms admit pure Nash equilibria and this equilibrium is unique. We also give an algorithm to compute this equilibrium in polynomial time. Further, we show that the revenue of the auctioneer is promisingly high compared to the ultimate, i.e., the highest value of any of the bidders, and show bounds on the revenue of equilibria both analytically, as well as using experiments for specific quasi-proportional functions. This is the first known revenue analysis for these natural mechanisms (including the special case of proportional mechanism which is common in network resource allocation problems).

Wiretapping a hidden network

Abstract: We consider the problem of maximizing the probability of hitting a strategically chosen hidden virtual network by placing a wiretap on a single link of a communication network. This can be seen as a two-player win-lose (zero-sum) game that we call the wiretap game. The value of this game is the greatest probability that the wiretapper can secure for hitting the virtual network. The value is shown to equal the reciprocal of the strength of the underlying graph. We efficiently compute a unique partition of the edges of the graph, called the prime-partition, and find the set of pure strategies of the hider that are best responses against every maxmin strategy of the wiretapper. Using these special pure strategies of the hider, which we call omni-connected-spanning-subgraphs, we define a partial order on the elements of the prime-partition. From the partial order, we obtain a linear number of simple two-variable inequalities that define the maxmin-polytope, and a characterization of its extreme points. Our definition of the partial order allows us to find all equilibrium strategies of the wiretapper that minimize the number of pure best responses of the hider. Among these strategies, we efficiently compute the unique strategy that maximizes the least punishment that the hider incurs for playing a pure strategy that is not a best response. Finally, we show that this unique strategy is the nucleolus of the recently studied simple cooperative spanning connectivity game.

Dynamic and Non-Uniform Pricing Strategies for Revenue Maximization

Abstract: We consider the Item Pricing problem for revenue maximization in the limited supply setting, where a single seller with $n$ items caters to $m$ buyers with unknown subadditive valuation functions who arrive in a sequence. The seller sets the prices on individual items. Each buyer buys a subset of yet unsold items that maximizes her utility. Our goal is to design pricing strategies that guarantee an expected revenue that is within a small factor $\alpha$ of the maximum possible social welfare -- an upper bound on the maximum revenue that can be generated. Most earlier work has focused on the unlimited supply setting, where selling items to some buyer does not affect their availability to the future buyers. Balcan et. al. (EC 2008) studied the limited supply setting, giving a randomized strategy that assigns a single price to all items (uniform strategy), and never changes it (static strategy), that gives an $2^{O(\sqrt{\log n \log \log n})}$-approximation, and moreover, no static uniform pricing strategy can give better than $2^{\Omega(\log^{1/4} n)}$- approximation. We improve this lower bound to $2^{\Omega(sqrt{\log n})}$. We consider dynamic uniform strategies, which can change the price upon the arrival of each buyer but the price on all unsold items is the same at all times, and static non-uniform strategies, which can assign different prices to different items but can never change it after setting it initially. We design such pricing strategies that give a poly-logarithmic approximation to maximum revenue. Thus in the limited supply setting, our results highlight a strong separation between the power of dynamic and non-uniform pricing versus static uniform pricing. To our knowledge, this is the first non-trivial analysis of dynamic and non-uniform pricing schemes for revenue maximization.

A Natural Dynamics for Bargaining on Exchange Networks

Abstract: Bargaining networks model the behavior of a set of players that need to reach pairwise agreements for making profits. Nash bargaining solutions are special outcomes of such games that are both stable and balanced. Kleinberg and Tardos proved a sharp algorithmic characterization of such outcomes, but left open the problem of how the actual bargaining process converges to them. A partial answer was provided by Azar et al. who proposed a distributed algorithm for constructing Nash bargaining solutions, but without polynomial bounds on its convergence rate. In this paper, we introduce a simple and natural model for this process, and study its convergence rate to Nash bargaining solutions. At each time step, each player proposes a deal to each of her neighbors. The proposal consists of a share of the potential profit in case of agreement. The share is chosen to be balanced in Nash's sense as far as this is feasible (with respect to the current best alternatives for both players). We prove that, whenever the Nash bargaining solution is unique (and satisfies a positive gap condition) this dynamics converges to it in polynomial time. Our analysis is based on an approximate decoupling phenomenon between the dynamics on different substructures of the network. This approach may be of general interest for the analysis of local algorithms on networks.

On the complexity of Nash dynamics and Sink Equilibria

Abstract: Studying Nash dynamics is an important approach for analyzing the outcome of games with repeated selfish behavior of self-interested agents. Sink equilibria has been introduced by Goemans, Mirrokni, and Vetta for studying social cost on Nash dynamics over pure strategies in games. However, they do not address the complexity of sink equilibria in these games. Recently, Fabrikant and Papadimitriou initiated the study of the complexity of Nash dynamics in two classes of games. In order to completely understand the complexity of Nash dynamics in a variety of games, we study the following three questions for various games: (i) given a state in game, can we verify if this state is in a sink equilibrium or not? (ii) given an instance of a game, can we verify if there exists any sink equilibrium other than pure Nash equilibria? and (iii) given an instance of a game, can we verify if there exists a pure Nash equilibrium (i.e, a sink equilibrium with one state)? In this paper, we almost answer all of the above questions for a variety of classes of games with succinct representation, including anonymous games, player-specific and weighted congestion games, valid-utility games, and two-sided market games. In particular, for most of these problems, we show that (i) it is PSPACE-complete to verify if a given state is in a sink equilibrium, (ii) it is NP-hard to verify if there exists a pure Nash equilibrium in the game or not, (iii) it is PSPACE-complete to verify if there exists any sink equilibrium other than pure Nash equilibria. To solve these problems, we illustrate general techniques that could be used to answer similar questions in other classes of games.

A Super-Polynomial Lower Bound for the Parity Game Strategy Improvement Algorithm as We Know it

Abstract: This paper presents a new lower bound for the discrete strategy improvement algorithm for solving parity games due to Voege and Jurdziski. First, we informally show which structures are difficult to solve for the algorithm. Second, we outline a family of games of quadratic size on which the algorithm requires exponentially many strategy iterations, answering in the negative the long-standing question whether this algorithm runs in polynomial time. Additionally we note that the same family of games can be used to prove a similar result w.r.t. the strategy improvement variant by Schewe.

Undirected Graphs of Entanglement Two

Abstract: Entanglement is a complexity measure of directed graphs that origins in fixed point theory. This measure has shown its use in designing efficient algorithms to verify logical properties of transition systems. We are interested in the problem of deciding whether a graph has entanglement at most k. As this measure is defined by means of games, game theoretic ideas naturally lead to design polynomial algorithms that, for fixed k, decide the problem. Known characterizations of directed graphs of entanglement at most 1 lead, for k = 1, to design even faster algorithms. In this paper we present an explicit characterization of undirected graphs of entanglement at most 2. With such a characterization at hand, we devise a linear time algorithm to decide whether an undirected graph has this property.

Bid Optimization in Broad-Match Ad auctions

Abstract: Ad auctions in sponsored search support ``broad match'' that allows an advertiser to target a large number of queries while bidding only on a limited number. While giving more expressiveness to advertisers, this feature makes it challenging to optimize bids to maximize their returns: choosing to bid on a query as a broad match because it provides high profit results in one bidding for related queries which may yield low or even negative profits. We abstract and study the complexity of the {\em bid optimization problem} which is to determine an advertiser's bids on a subset of keywords (possibly using broad match) so that her profit is maximized. In the query language model when the advertiser is allowed to bid on all queries as broad match, we present an linear programming (LP)-based polynomial-time algorithm that gets the optimal profit. In the model in which an advertiser can only bid on keywords, ie., a subset of keywords as an exact or broad match, we show that this problem is not approximable within any reasonable approximation factor unless P=NP. To deal with this hardness result, we present a constant-factor approximation when the optimal profit significantly exceeds the cost. This algorithm is based on rounding a natural LP formulation of the problem. Finally, we study a budgeted variant of the problem, and show that in the query language model, one can find two budget constrained ad campaigns in polynomial time that implement the optimal bidding strategy. Our results are the first to address bid optimization under the broad match feature which is common in ad auctions.

Bayesian Algorithmic Mechanism Design

Abstract: The principal problem in algorithmic mechanism design is in merging the incentive constraints imposed by selfish behavior with the algorithmic constraints imposed by computational intractability. This field is motivated by the observation that the preeminent approach for designing incentive compatible mechanisms, namely that of Vickrey, Clarke, and Groves; and the central approach for circumventing computational obstacles, that of approximation algorithms, are fundamentally incompatible: natural applications of the VCG approach to an approximation algorithm fails to yield an incentive compatible mechanism. We consider relaxing the desideratum of (ex post) incentive compatibility (IC) to Bayesian incentive compatibility (BIC), where truthtelling is a Bayes-Nash equilibrium (the standard notion of incentive compatibility in economics). For welfare maximization in single-parameter agent settings, we give a general black-box reduction that turns any approximation algorithm into a Bayesian incentive compatible mechanism with essentially the same approximation factor.

On the Complexity of Envy-Free Cake Cutting

Abstract: We study the envy-free cake-cutting problem for $d+1$ players with $d$ cuts, for both the oracle function model and the polynomial time function model. For the former, we derive a $\theta(({1\over\epsilon})^{d-1})$ time matching bound for the query complexity of $d+1$ player cake cutting with Lipschitz utilities for any $d> 1$. When the utility functions are given by a polynomial time algorithm, we prove the problem to be PPAD-complete. For measurable utility functions, we find a fully polynomial-time algorithm for finding an approximate envy-free allocation of a cake among three people using two cuts.

Linear Complementarity Algorithms for Infinite Games

Abstract: The performance of two pivoting algorithms, due to Lemke and Cottle and Dantzig, is studied on linear complementarity problems (LCPs) that arise from infinite games, such as parity, average-reward, and discounted games. The algorithms have not been previously studied in the context of infinite games, and they offer alternatives to the classical strategy-improvement algorithms. The two algorithms are described purely in terms of discounted games, thus bypassing the reduction from the games to LCPs, and hence facilitating a better understanding of the algorithms when applied to games. A family of parity games is given, on which both algorithms run in exponential time, indicating that in the worst case they perform no better for parity, average-reward, or discounted games than they do for general P-matrix LCPs.

One-Counter Markov Decision Processes

Abstract: We study the computational complexity of central analysis problems for One-Counter Markov Decision Processes (OC-MDPs), a class of finitely-presented, countable-state MDPs. OC-MDPs are equivalent to a controlled extension of (discrete-time) Quasi-Birth-Death processes (QBDs), a stochastic model studied heavily in queueing theory and applied probability. They can thus be viewed as a natural ``adversarial'' version of a classic stochastic model. Alternatively, they can also be viewed as a natural probabilistic/controlled extension of classic one-counter automata. OC-MDPs also subsume (as a very restricted special case) a recently studied MDP model called ``solvency games'' that model a risk-averse gambling scenario. Basic computational questions about these models include ``termination'' questions and ``limit'' questions, such as the following: does the controller have a ``strategy'' (or ``policy'') to ensure that the counter (which may for example count the number of jobs in the queue) will hit value 0 (the empty queue) almost surely (a.s.)? Or that it will have infinite limsup value, a.s.? Or, that it will hit value 0 in selected terminal states, a.s.? Or, in case these are not satisfied a.s., compute the maximum (supremum) such probability over all strategies. We provide new upper and lower bounds on the complexity of such problems. For some of them we present a polynomial-time algorithm, whereas for others we show PSPACE- or BH-hardness and give an EXPTIME upper bound. Our upper bounds combine techniques from the theory of MDP reward models, the theory of random walks, and a variety of automata-theoretic methods.

Incentive Compatible Budget Elicitation in Multi-unit Auctions

Abstract: In this paper, we consider the problem of designing incentive compatible auctions for multiple (homogeneous) units of a good, when bidders have private valuations and private budget constraints. When only the valuations are private and the budgets are public, Dobzinski {\em et al} show that the {\em adaptive clinching} auction is the unique incentive-compatible auction achieving Pareto-optimality. They further show thatthere is no deterministic Pareto-optimal auction with private budgets. Our main contribution is to show the following Budget Monotonicity property of this auction: When there is only one infinitely divisible good, a bidder cannot improve her utility by reporting a budget smaller than the truth. This implies that a randomized modification to the adaptive clinching auction is incentive compatible and Pareto-optimal with private budgets. The Budget Monotonicity property also implies other improved results in this context. For revenue maximization, the same auction improves the best-known competitive ratio due to Abrams by a factor of 4, and asymptotically approaches the performance of the optimal single-price auction. Finally, we consider the problem of revenue maximization (or social welfare) in a Bayesian setting. We allow the bidders have public size constraints (on the amount of good they are willing to buy) in addition to private budget constraints. We show a simple poly-time computable 5.83-approximation to the optimal Bayesian incentive compatible mechanism, that is implementable in dominant strategies. Our technique again crucially needs the ability to prevent bidders from over-reporting budgets via randomization.