arXiv subjects

Alon Eden

Publications and source records attributed to Alon Eden.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

From Welfare to Utility: Generalized Objectives in Budget-Feasible Procurement

We study mechanism design for the budget-feasible procurement problem, a natural problem that arises when a buyer wants to procure goods or services from multiple strategic sellers who each have a cost to provide that service, the buyer has a value for each service procured, but is constrained by a budget. In contrast to prior work, which has focused on buyer value maximization for this problem, we solve for optimal and approximately-optimal mechanisms for the objectives of buyer utility (value of procured services minus payments), welfare (value minus production costs), and generalizations of the two. For welfare, we design a simple mechanism that obtains a constant-factor approximation for the prior-free (worst-case) setting. As prior-free mechanisms fail to provide any guarantee for utility, even for a single seller, we consider Bayesian settings, where the buyer has distributional knowledge over sellers' costs. We first provide a utility-optimal mechanism that satisfies the buyer's budget constraint in expectation, then we show how to modify the mechanism to satisfy the budget constraint ex-post, for every realization of seller costs, while still obtaining near-optimal utility guarantees. Finally, we generalize our mechanisms to other objectives.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2025

Approximating Pandora's Knapsack via Simple Policies

We introduce Pandora's Knapsack: a hybrid between the classic stochastic knapsack problem [Dean et al., 2008] and Pandora's box [Weitzman, 1979]. As in stochastic knapsack, items have sizes drawn from known distributions, and items that fit within a knapsack contribute to the total value. As in Pandora, every item $i$ comes in a box that costs $c_i$ to open. What distinguishes our problem is that the size is revealed only after opening the box and paying the cost. We study the power of simple decision-making policies to approximate Pandora's Knapsack, along two complexity axes: (i)~knowledge of size distributions, and (ii)~adaptivity. We show that adding costs to stochastic knapsack completely changes the algorithmic landscape, and policies must now be complex along both axes to be approximately-optimal. We complement these impossibilities by showing that with full distributional information and slightly more adaptivity---allowing adaptive skipping of items---a constant approximation can be recovered. Our analysis reveals an economic quantity, namely ROI (return-on-investment, defined as the jobs' minimum utility over cost), which smoothly characterizes the performance of simple policies. Across a hierarchy of increasingly adaptive policies, we establish near-tight adaptivity gaps all governed by ROI. To demonstrate the importance of the ROI parameter in characterizing simple policies, we revisit Pandora's Box, and show that return-on-investment exactly captures the adaptivity gap in this classic problem as well. As a corollary, we get that simple policies are approximately-optimal provided the ROI is sufficiently large.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2025

Interdependent Bilateral Trade: Information vs Approximation

Welfare maximization in bilateral trade has been extensively studied in recent years. Previous literature obtained incentive-compatible approximation mechanisms only for the private values case. In this paper, we study welfare maximization in bilateral trade with interdependent values. Designing mechanisms for interdependent settings is much more challenging because the values of the players depend on the private information of the others, requiring complex belief updates and strategic inference. We propose to classify information structures by quantifying the influence that a player's private signal has on their own valuation. We then paint a picture of where approximations are possible and impossible based on these information structures. Finally, we also study the possible approximation ratios for a natural family of information structures.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2025

Stable Matching under Matroid Rank Valuations

We study a two-sided matching model where one side of the market (hospitals) has combinatorial preferences over the other side (doctors). Specifically, we consider the setting where hospitals have matroid rank valuations over the doctors, and doctors have either ordinal or cardinal unit-demand valuations over the hospitals. While this setting has been extensively studied in the context of one-sided markets, it remains unexplored in the context of two-sided markets. When doctors have ordinal preferences over hospitals, we present simple sequential allocation algorithms that guarantee stability, strategyproofness for doctors, and approximate strategyproofness for hospitals. When doctors have cardinal utilities over hospitals, we present an algorithm that finds a stable allocation maximizing doctor welfare; subject to that, we show how one can maximize either the hospital utilitarian or hospital Nash welfare. Moreover, we show that it is NP-hard to compute stable allocations that approximately maximize hospital Nash welfare.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2025

Fair Division via Resource Augmentation

We introduce and formalize the notion of resource augmentation for maximin share (MMS) fairness for the allocation of indivisible goods. Given an instance with $n$ agents and $m$ goods, we ask how many copies of the goods should be added in order to guarantee that each agent receives at least their original MMS value, or a meaningful approximation thereof. For general monotone valuations, we establish a tight bound: an exact MMS allocation can be guaranteed using at most $\Theta(m/e)$ total copies, and this bound is tight even for XOS valuations. We further show that it is unavoidable to duplicate some goods $\Omega(\ln m / \ln \ln m)$ times, and provide matching upper bounds. For additive valuations, we show that at most $\min\{n-2,\lfloor\frac{m}{3}\rfloor(1+o(1))\}$ distinct copies suffice. This separates additive valuations from submodular valuations, for which we show that $n-1$ copies may be necessary. We also study approximate MMS guarantees for additive valuations and establish new tradeoffs between the number of copies needed and the approximation guaratee. In particular, we prove that $\lfloor{n/2}\rfloor$ copies suffice to guarantee a $6/7$-approximation to the original MMS, and $\lfloor{n/3}\rfloor$ copies suffice for a $4/5$-approximation. Both results improve upon the best-known approximation guarantees for additive valuations in the absence of copies. Finally, we relate MMS with copies to the relaxed notion of 1-out-of-$d$ MMS, showing that improvements in either framework translate directly to the other. In particular, we establish the first impossibility results for 1-out-of-$d$ MMS. Our results highlight the power and limits of resource augmentation for achieving MMS fairness.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2025

Stable Marriage: Loyalty vs. Competition

We consider the stable matching problem (e.g. between doctors and hospitals) in a one-to-one matching setting, where preferences are drawn uniformly at random. It is known that when doctors propose and the number of doctors equals the number of hospitals, then the expected rank of doctors for their match is $\Theta(\log n)$, while the expected rank of the hospitals for their match is $\Theta(n/\log n)$, where $n$ is the size of each side of the market. However, when adding even a single doctor, [Ashlagi, Kanoria and Leshno, 2017] show that the tables have turned: doctors have expected rank of $\Theta(n/\log n)$ while hospitals have expected rank of $\Theta(\log n)$. That is, (slight) competition has a much more dramatically harmful effect than the benefit of being on the proposing side. Motivated by settings where agents inflate their value for an item if it is already allocated to them (termed endowment effect), we study the case where hospitals exhibit ``loyalty". We model loyalty as a parameter $k$, where a hospital currently matched to their $\ell$th most preferred doctor accepts proposals from their $\ell-k-1$th most preferred doctors. Hospital loyalty should help doctors mitigate the harmful effect of competition, as many more outcomes are now stable. However, we show that the effect of competition is so dramatic that, even in settings with extremely high loyalty, in unbalanced markets, the expected rank of doctors already becomes $\tilde{\Theta}(\sqrt{n})$ for loyalty $k=n-\sqrt{n}\log n=n(1-o(1))$.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2024

Plant-and-Steal: Truthful Fair Allocations via Predictions

We study truthful mechanisms for approximating the Maximin-Share (MMS) allocation of agents with additive valuations for indivisible goods. Algorithmically, constant factor approximations exist for the problem for any number of agents. When adding incentives to the mix, a jarring result by Amanatidis, Birmpas, Christodoulou, and Markakis [EC 2017] shows that the best possible approximation for two agents and $m$ items is $\lfloor \frac{m}{2} \rfloor$. We adopt a learning-augmented framework to investigate what is possible when some prediction on the input is given. For two agents, we give a truthful mechanism that takes agents' ordering over items as prediction. When the prediction is accurate, we give a $2$-approximation to the MMS (consistency), and when the prediction is off, we still get an $\lceil \frac{m}{2} \rceil$-approximation to the MMS (robustness). We further show that the mechanism's performance degrades gracefully in the number of ``mistakes" in the prediction; i.e., we interpolate (up to constant factors) between the two extremes: when there are no mistakes, and when there is a maximum number of mistakes. We also show an impossibility result on the obtainable consistency for mechanisms with finite robustness. For the general case of $n\ge 2$ agents, we give a 2-approximation mechanism for accurate predictions, with relaxed fallback guarantees. Finally, we give experimental results which illustrate when different components of our framework, made to insure consistency and robustness, come into play.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2024

Private Interdependent Valuations: New Bounds for Single-Item Auctions and Matroids

We study auction design within the widely acclaimed model of interdependent values, introduced by Milgrom and Weber [1982]. In this model, every bidder $i$ has a private signal $s_i$ for the item for sale, and a public valuation function $v_i(s_1,\ldots,s_n)$ which maps every vector of private signals (of all bidders) into a real value. A recent line of work established the existence of approximately-optimal mechanisms within this framework, even in the more challenging scenario where each bidder's valuation function $v_i$ is also private. This body of work has primarily focused on single-item auctions with two natural classes of valuations: those exhibiting submodularity over signals (SOS) and $d$-critical valuations. In this work we advance the state of the art on interdependent values with private valuation functions, with respect to both SOS and $d$-critical valuations. For SOS valuations, we devise a new mechanism that gives an improved approximation bound of $5$ for single-item auctions. This mechanism employs a novel variant of an "eating mechanism", leveraging LP-duality to achieve feasibility with reduced welfare loss. For $d$-critical valuations, we broaden the scope of existing results beyond single-item auctions, introducing a mechanism that gives a $(d+1)$-approximation for any environment with matroid feasibility constraints on the set of agents that can be simultaneously served. Notably, this approximation bound is tight, even with respect to single-item auctions.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2023

Constant Approximation for Private Interdependent Valuations

The celebrated model of auctions with interdependent valuations, introduced by Milgrom and Weber in 1982, has been studied almost exclusively under private signals $s_1, \ldots, s_n$ of the $n$ bidders and public valuation functions $v_i(s_1, \ldots, s_n)$. Recent work in TCS has shown that this setting admits a constant approximation to the optimal social welfare if the valuations satisfy a natural property called submodularity over signals (SOS). More recently, Eden et al. (2022) have extended the analysis of interdependent valuations to include settings with private signals and private valuations, and established $O(\log^2 n)$-approximation for SOS valuations. In this paper we show that this setting admits a constant factor approximation, settling the open question raised by Eden et al. (2022).

cs.GT↗

arXiv2023

Platform Equilibrium: Analayzing Social Welfare in Online Market Places

We introduce the theoretical study of a Platform Equilibrium in a market with unit-demand buyers and unit-supply sellers. Each seller can join a platform and transact with any buyer or remain off-platform and transact with a subset of buyers whom she knows. Given the constraints on trade, prices form a competitive equilibrium and clears the market. The platform charges a transaction fee to all on-platform sellers, in the form of a fraction of on-platform sellers' price. The platform chooses the fraction to maximize revenue. A Platform Equilibrium is a Nash equilibrium of the game where each seller decides whether or not to join the platform, balancing the effect of a larger pool of buyers to trade with, against the imposition of a transaction fee. Our main insights are: (i) In homogeneous-goods markets, pure equilibria always exist and can be found by a polynomial-time algorithm; (ii) When the platform is unregulated, the resulting Platform Equilibrium guarantees a tight $\Theta(log(min(m, n)))$-approximation of the optimal welfare in homogeneous-goods markets, where $n$ and $m$ are the number of buyers and sellers respectively; (iii) Even light regulation helps: when the platform's fee is capped at $\alpha\in[0,1)$, the price of anarchy is 2-$\alpha$/1-$\alpha$ for general markets. For example, if the platform takes 30 percent of the seller's revenue, a rather high fee, our analysis implies the welfare in a Platform Equilibrium is still a 0.412-fraction of the optimal welfare. Our main results extend to markets with multiple platforms, beyond unit-demand buyers, as well as to sellers with production costs.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2023

Platform Behavior under Market Shocks: A Simulation Framework and Reinforcement-Learning Based Study

We study the behavior of an economic platform (e.g., Amazon, Uber Eats, Instacart) under shocks, such as COVID-19 lockdowns, and the effect of different regulation considerations imposed on a platform. To this end, we develop a multi-agent Gym environment of a platform economy in a dynamic, multi-period setting, with the possible occurrence of economic shocks. Buyers and sellers are modeled as economically-motivated agents, choosing whether or not to pay corresponding fees to use the platform. We formulate the platform's problem as a partially observable Markov decision process, and use deep reinforcement learning to model its fee setting and matching behavior. We consider two major types of regulation frameworks: (1) taxation policies and (2) platform fee restrictions, and offer extensive simulated experiments to characterize regulatory tradeoffs under optimal platform responses. Our results show that while many interventions are ineffective with a sophisticated platform actor, we identify a particular kind of regulation -- fixing fees to optimal, pre-shock fees while still allowing a platform to choose how to match buyer demands to sellers -- as promoting the efficiency, seller diversity, and resilience of the overall economic system.

cs.MA↗

arXiv2022

Stackelberg POMDP: A Reinforcement Learning Approach for Economic Design

We introduce a reinforcement learning framework for economic design where the interaction between the environment designer and the participants is modeled as a Stackelberg game. In this game, the designer (leader) sets up the rules of the economic system, while the participants (followers) respond strategically. We integrate algorithms for determining followers' response strategies into the leader's learning environment, providing a formulation of the leader's learning problem as a POMDP that we call the Stackelberg POMDP. We prove that the optimal leader's strategy in the Stackelberg game is the optimal policy in our Stackelberg POMDP under a limited set of possible policies, establishing a connection between solving POMDPs and Stackelberg games. We solve our POMDP under a limited set of policy options via the centralized training with decentralized execution framework. For the specific case of followers that are modeled as no-regret learners, we solve an array of increasingly complex settings, including problems of indirect mechanism design where there is turn-taking and limited communication by agents. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our training framework through ablation studies. We also give convergence results for no-regret learners to a Bayesian version of a coarse-correlated equilibrium, extending known results to correlated types.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2021

Cursed yet Satisfied Agents

In real life auctions, a widely observed phenomenon is the winner's curse -- the winner's high bid implies that the winner often over-estimates the value of the good for sale, resulting in an incurred negative utility. The seminal work of Eyster and Rabin [Econometrica'05] introduced a behavioral model aimed to explain this observed anomaly. We term agents who display this bias "cursed agents". We adopt their model in the interdependent value setting, and aim to devise mechanisms that prevent the cursed agents from obtaining negative utility. We design mechanisms that are cursed ex-post IC, that is, incentivize agents to bid their true signal even though they are cursed, while ensuring that the outcome is individually rational -- the price the agents pay is no more than the agents' true value. Since the agents might over-estimate the good's value, such mechanisms might require the seller to make positive transfers to the agents to prevent agents from over-paying. For revenue maximization, we give the optimal deterministic and anonymous mechanism. For welfare maximization, we require ex-post budget balance (EPBB), as positive transfers might lead to negative revenue. We propose a masking operation that takes any deterministic mechanism, and imposes that the seller would not make positive transfers, enforcing EPBB. We show that in typical settings, EPBB implies that the mechanism cannot make any positive transfers, implying that applying the masking operation on the fully efficient mechanism results in a socially optimal EPBB mechanism. This further implies that if the valuation function is the maximum of agents' signals, the optimal EPBB mechanism obtains zero welfare. In contrast, we show that for sum-concave valuations, which include weighted-sum valuations and l_p-norms, the welfare optimal EPBB mechanism obtains half of the optimal welfare as the number of agents grows large.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2021

Private Interdependent Valuations

We consider the single-item interdependent value setting, where there is a monopolist, $n$ buyers, and each buyer has a private signal $s_i$ describing a piece of information about the item. Each bidder $i$ also has a valuation function $v_i(s_1,\ldots,s_n)$ mapping the (private) signals of all buyers to a positive real number representing their value for the item. This setting captures scenarios where the item's information is asymmetric or dispersed among agents, such as in competitions for oil drilling rights, or in auctions for art pieces. Due to the increased complexity of this model compared to standard private values, it is generally assumed that each bidder's valuation function $v_i$ is public knowledge. But in many situations, the seller may not know how a bidder aggregates signals into a valuation. In this paper, we design mechanisms that guarantee approximately-optimal social welfare while satisfying ex-post incentive compatibility and individual rationality for the case where the valuation functions are private to the bidders. When the valuations are public, it is possible for optimal social welfare to be attained by a deterministic mechanism under a single-crossing condition. In contrast, when the valuations are the bidders' private information, we show that no finite bound can be achieved by any deterministic mechanism even under single-crossing. Moreover, no randomized mechanism can guarantee better than an $n$-approximation. We thus consider valuation functions that are submodular over signals (SOS), introduced in the context of combinatorial auctions in a recent breakthrough paper by Eden et al. [EC'19]. Our main result is an $O(\log^2 n)$-approximation for buyers with private signals and valuations under the SOS condition. We also give a tight $Θ(k)$-approximation for the case each agent's valuation depends on at most $k$ other signals even for unknown $k$.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2021

Reinforcement Learning of Sequential Price Mechanisms

We introduce the use of reinforcement learning for indirect mechanisms, working with the existing class of sequential price mechanisms, which generalizes both serial dictatorship and posted price mechanisms and essentially characterizes all strongly obviously strategyproof mechanisms. Learning an optimal mechanism within this class forms a partially-observable Markov decision process. We provide rigorous conditions for when this class of mechanisms is more powerful than simpler static mechanisms, for sufficiency or insufficiency of observation statistics for learning, and for the necessity of complex (deep) policies. We show that our approach can learn optimal or near-optimal mechanisms in several experimental settings.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2021

Price of Anarchy of Simple Auctions with Interdependent Values

We expand the literature on the price of anarchy (PoA) of simultaneous item auctions by considering settings with correlated values; we do this via the fundamental economic model of interdependent values (IDV). It is well-known that in multi-item settings with private values, correlated values can lead to bad PoA, which can be polynomially large in the number of agents $n$. In the more general model of IDV, we show that the PoA can be polynomially large even in single-item settings. On the positive side, we identify a natural condition on information dispersion in the market, termed $γ$-heterogeneity, which enables good PoA guarantees. Under this condition, we show that for single-item settings, the PoA of standard mechanisms degrades gracefully with $γ$. For settings with $m>1$ items we show a separation between two domains: If $n \geq m$, we devise a new simultaneous item auction with good PoA (with respect to $γ$), under limited information asymmetry. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first positive PoA result for correlated values in multi-item settings. The main technical difficulty in establishing this result is that the standard tool for establishing PoA results -- the smoothness framework -- is unsuitable for IDV settings, and so we must introduce new techniques to address the unique challenges imposed by such settings. In the domain of $n \ll m$, we establish impossibility results even for surprisingly simple scenarios.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2020

On the Power and Limits of Dynamic Pricing in Combinatorial Markets

We study the power and limits of optimal dynamic pricing in combinatorial markets; i.e., dynamic pricing that leads to optimal social welfare. Previous work by Cohen-Addad et al. [EC'16] demonstrated the existence of optimal dynamic prices for unit-demand buyers, and showed a market with coverage valuations that admits no such prices. However, finding the frontier of markets (i.e., valuation functions) that admit optimal dynamic prices remains an open problem. In this work we establish positive and negative results that narrow the existing gap. On the positive side, we provide tools for handling markets beyond unit-demand valuations. In particular, we characterize all optimal allocations in multi-demand markets. This characterization allows us to partition the items into equivalence classes according to the role they play in achieving optimality. Using these tools, we provide a poly-time optimal dynamic pricing algorithm for up to $3$ multi-demand buyers. On the negative side, we establish a maximal domain theorem, showing that for every non-gross substitutes valuation, there exist unit-demand valuations such that adding them yields a market that does not admit an optimal dynamic pricing. This result is the dynamic pricing equivalent of the seminal maximal domain theorem by Gul and Stacchetti [JET'99] for Walrasian equilibrium. Yang [JET'17] discovered an error in their original proof, and established a different, incomparable version of their maximal domain theorem. En route to our maximal domain theorem for optimal dynamic pricing, we provide the first complete proof of the original theorem by Gul and Stacchetti.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2020

An Economic-Based Analysis of RANKING for Online Bipartite Matching

In their seminal paper, Karp, Vazirani and Vazirani (STOC'90) introduce the online bipartite matching problem, and the RANKING algorithm, which admits a tight $1-\frac{1}{e}$ competitive ratio. Since its publication, the problem has received considerable attention, including a sequence of simplified proofs. In this paper we present a new proof that gives an economic interpretation of the RANKING algorithm -- further simplifying the proof and avoiding arguments such as duality. The new proof gives a new perspective on previous proofs.

cs.GT↗