Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2608.24537

Easier, but Not Easy: Nash Welfare under Lexicographic Valuations

Soumil Aggarwal·Rohit Vaish·Jatin Yadav
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Maximizing Nash welfare over indivisible goods is a central problem in resource allocation. For additive valuations, the best-known approximation factor is roughly $e^{-1/e}\approx0.692$, and the problem is APX-hard. We study Nash welfare maximization under lexicographic valuations, where every good is worth more than the total value of all lower-ranked goods. This large-gap structure makes preferences almost ordinal, which might suggest that the problem becomes easy. We show, however, that the picture is more nuanced: although lexicographic valuations enable stronger algorithmic guarantees, they retain significant computational hardness. Our first main result is a $(1/\sqrt{2}-\epsilon)\approx(0.707-\epsilon)$-approximation algorithm for weighted Nash welfare under lexicographic valuations, improving over the inherited guarantee of roughly $e^{-1/e}$. The algorithm rounds the configuration LP for Nash welfare, for which we show a matching integrality gap of $\sqrt{2}$. Our second main contribution is an exact algorithmic polynomial time framework for ordered lexicographic instances and doubling lexicographic instances. We introduce a domination-based branch-and-prune method for which we prove a mutual-exclusion property between sibling subtrees and use a matrix-based leaf-counting argument to bound the pruned recursion tree by a polynomial when the number of agents is constant. Finally, we show that large gaps do not eliminate hardness, as Nash welfare maximization is NP-hard even for ordered lexicographic valuations, and it is NP-hard to obtain a $0.9996$-approximation even for doubling lexicographic valuations. Thus, lexicographic valuations make Nash welfare maximization easier, but not easy: they admit tighter approximation and exact algorithms in important cases, yet still require intricate techniques and preserve some of the hardness of the general additive setting.

Explore related subjects

cs.GTcs.DS

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Soumil Aggarwal, Rohit Vaish, Jatin Yadav. 2026-08-25. Easier, but Not Easy: Nash Welfare under Lexicographic Valuations. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.24537

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↗