Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2504.09669

Nash Social Welfare with Submodular Valuations: Approximation Algorithms and Integrality Gaps

Xiaohui Bei·Yuda Feng·Yang Hu·Shi Li·Ruilong Zhang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We study the problem of allocating items to agents with submodular valuations with the goal of maximizing the weighted Nash social welfare (NSW). The best-known results for unweighted and weighted objectives are the $(4+\epsilon)$ approximation given by Garg, Husic, Li, V\'egh, and Vondr\'ak~[STOC 2023] and the $(233+\epsilon)$ approximation given by Feng, Hu, Li, and Zhang~[STOC 2025], respectively. In this work, we present a $(3.56+\epsilon)$-approximation algorithm for weighted NSW maximization with submodular valuations, simultaneously improving the previous approximation ratios of both the weighted and unweighted NSW problems. Our algorithm solves the configuration LP of Feng, Hu, Li, and Zhang~[STOC 2025] via a stronger separation oracle that loses an $e/(e-1)$ factor only on small items, and then rounds the solution via a new bipartite multigraph construction. Some key technical ingredients of our analysis include a greedy proxy function, additive within each configuration, that preserves the LP value while lower-bounding the rounded solution, together with refined concentration bounds and a series of mathematical programs analyzed partly by computer assistance. On the hardness side, we prove that the configuration LP for weighted NSW with submodular valuations has an integrality gap of at least $(2^{\ln 2}-\epsilon) \approx 1.617 - \epsilon$, which is larger than the current best-known $e/(e-1)-\epsilon \approx 1.582-\epsilon$ hardness~[SODA 2020]. For additive valuations, we show an integrality gap of $(e^{1/e}-\epsilon)$, which proves the tightness of the approximation ratio in~[ICALP 2024] for algorithms based on the configuration LP. For unweighted NSW with additive valuations, we show an integrality gap of $(2^{1/4}-\epsilon) \approx 1.189-\epsilon$, again larger than the current best-known $\sqrt{8/7} \approx 1.069$-hardness~[Math. Oper. Res. 2024].

Explore related subjects

cs.GTcs.DS

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Xiaohui Bei, Yuda Feng, Yang Hu, Shi Li, Ruilong Zhang. 2025-04-13. Nash Social Welfare with Submodular Valuations: Approximation Algorithms and Integrality Gaps. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.09669

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↗