To Give or Not to Give: Fair Division for Single Minded Valuations

Simina Brânzei; Yuezhou Lv; Ruta Mehta

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1602.09088

To Give or Not to Give: Fair Division for Single Minded Valuations

Simina Brânzei·Yuezhou Lv·Ruta Mehta

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Single minded agents have strict preferences, in which a bundle is acceptable only if it meets a certain demand. Such preferences arise naturally in scenarios such as allocating computational resources among users, where the goal is to fairly serve as many requests as possible. In this paper we study the fair division problem for such agents, which is harder to handle due to discontinuity and complementarities of the preferences. Our solution concept---the competitive allocation from equal incomes (CAEI)---is inspired from market equilibria and implements fair outcomes through a pricing mechanism. We study the existence and computation of CAEI for multiple divisible goods, cake cutting, and multiple discrete goods. For the first two scenarios we show that existence of CAEI solutions is guaranteed, while for the third we give a succinct characterization of instances that admit this solution; then we give an efficient algorithm to find one in all three cases. Maximizing social welfare turns out to be NP-hard in general, however we obtain efficient algorithms for (i) divisible and discrete goods when the number of different \emph{types} of players is a constant, (ii) cake cutting with contiguous demands, for which we establish an interesting connection with interval scheduling, and (iii) cake cutting with a constant number of players with arbitrary demands. Our solution is useful more generally, when the players have a target set of desired goods, and very small positive values for any bundle not containing their target set.

Explore related subjects

cs.GT

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Simina Brânzei, Yuezhou Lv, Ruta Mehta. 2016-02-29. To Give or Not to Give: Fair Division for Single Minded Valuations. https://arxiv.org/abs/1602.09088

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

MMS Allocation for Chores with Online Agent Arrivals

We study the fair allocation of $m$ indivisible chores to $n$ agents with subadditive cost functions arriving online in an arbitrary order. Upon an agent's arrival, we are informed of her cost function and must irrevocably assign her a set of chores. We focus on the Maximin Share (MMS) fairness notion and aim to compute an allocation in which all items are assigned, and no agent incurs a cost more than $\alpha$ times her MMS. Without any prior information about the instance (other than $n$ and $m$), we design an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{n, k\log^{1+\epsilon}k, \log m\})$ for any constant $\epsilon > 0$, where $k$ denotes the number of cost function types. Our bound matches the best known offline approximation guarantees for MMS under subadditive costs and is nearly optimal with respect to all three parameters: we show that even for binary additive cost functions, no online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio of $o(\min\{n, k\log k, \log m\})$. We then consider the setting in which the $k$ cost function types are known in advance (though the realized types of arriving agents are not). For additive cost functions, we provide an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{\log k, \log(kn)/\log\log(kn)\})$, and show that constant-competitive algorithms do not exist for general $k$, even for the binary additive setting. For binary additive functions when $k \le n$, we propose a $3$-competitive algorithm and establish a lower bound of $2$.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Truncated Noisy Best-Response Algorithms: Toward Game Theoretic Learning with Safety Guarantees

We consider a game theoretic approach to solve multi-agent coordination problems with submodular maximization objectives. It is known for such problems that the Nash equilibria for the corresponding game are always within 50% of the optimal, but that the equilibria which achieve this worst-case bound are not stable. To exploit this instability, we propose a family of algorithms which we call Truncated Noisy Best-Response (TNBR) Algorithms. These algorithms are flexibly characterized by agents asynchronously and stochastically selecting actions from a neighbourhood of their best response payoffs. We compute bounds on the recurrent classes of TNBR algorithms' associated Markov chains. Our bounds fall into two categories: first, "Performance" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms always have a high-value recurrent state; second, "Safety" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms never have arbitrarily-bad recurrent states. Furthermore, these two types of bounds are linked by a waterbed-like effect: every game with a poor Safety guarantee necessarily has a favorable Performance guarantee.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Existence of the Core in Approval-Based Committee Elections

We settle the main open question in the theory of approval-based multi-winner elections: we show that there always exists a committee in the core. The core is a stability and group fairness concept. The proof introduces a new voting rule that optimizes an entropy-like objective function over committees and payment systems. All local optima of this objective function lie in the core, which implies that a core committee can be found in polynomial time.

cs.GT↗