arXiv subjects

Amos Fiat

Publications and source records attributed to Amos Fiat.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Multi Choice Min Prophet

We study the minimization counterpart of the classic prophet inequality, often termed the min prophet or cost prophet inequality. Unlike the maximization setting, where simple threshold algorithms achieve half of the prophet's value, the minimization setting is significantly harder, with an exponential lower bound even for i.i.d.\ variables. We study a multi-choice relaxation in which the algorithm may select multiple variables and gets to choose the best amongst them (the minimum amongst those selected). Our goal is to minimize the expected number of selections while achieving a constant competitive ratio. For adversarial order, we show that a constant competitive ratio requires a nearly linear number of choices in expectation, ergo, $\Omega(n/\ln n)$. In contrast, we show that for the prophet secretary model (random order) one can attain constant competitiveness while requiring only an exponentially smaller expected number of choices i.e. $O(\ln n)$. We give a refined analysis and define $M$ to be the ratio of the minimum expected value of any single variable to the expected minimum value of all variables (the prophet's value) and present an algorithm that achieves a constant competitive ratio with $O(\min\{\ln \ln M, \ln n\})$ choices in expectation for the prophet secretary. We show that this is tight up to low order log factors even for the special case of the i.i.d. model. We also show that if we insist on a deterministic bound on the number of choices then every constant competitive algorithm requires $n$ choices. This holds even in the i.i.d.\ setting Finally, we consider a variant where both the algorithm and the adversary choose $r$ values and pay their sum, this is the minimization multi unit version. We extend our techniques to the multi-unit variant for i.i.d.\ variables, achieving a constant competitive ratio with a small expected number of choices.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Epistemic Pairwise Maximin Share

We introduce epistemic pairwise maximin share (EPMMS), a new fairness notion for fair division of indivisible goods. Two fundamental notions in this setting are envy-freeness up to any item (EFX) and pairwise maximin share (PMMS), with PMMS being stronger than EFX. While EFX has been extensively studied, far less is known about PMMS. Recent work shows that relaxing EFX via an epistemic perspective leads to substantial progress on the EFX problem, raising the question of whether a similar approach can advance our understanding of PMMS. Motivated by this, we initiate the study of EPMMS, the epistemic relaxation of PMMS. EPMMS is more challenging than EEFX: the key approaches underlying recent progress on epistemic EFX inherently fail to extend to EPMMS. We establish the following results. (1) For additive valuations, $4/5$-EPMMS allocations exist and can be efficiently computed. (2) For bivalued valuations, EPMMS allocations exist and can be efficiently computed; in fact, we obtain the stronger guarantee of epistemic groupwise maximin share (EGMMS), which also strengthens the existence of MMS allocations for this setting. (3) We prove that EPMMS allocations exist in two settings where MMS allocations need not exist: instances with three additive agents or two types of additive agents.

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↗

arXiv2023

Mechanism Design Without Disclosure: Committing to and Running Hidden Mechanisms

A central tenet in mechanism design is the ability to irrevocably commit to a mechanism. Commitment is achieved by public declaration, letting players verify incentive properties in advance and the outcome in retrospect. However, public declaration can reveal superfluous information that is private to the mechanism designer, such as her target function or costs. We propose a new approach to commitment, and show how to commit to, and run, any given mechanism without disclosing it, while enabling the verification of incentive properties and the outcome -- all without any mediators. Our framework leverages zero-knowledge proofs -- a cornerstone of modern cryptographic theory.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2022

An $\alpha$-regret analysis of Adversarial Bilateral Trade

We study sequential bilateral trade where sellers and buyers valuations are completely arbitrary (i.e., determined by an adversary). Sellers and buyers are strategic agents with private valuations for the good and the goal is to design a mechanism that maximizes efficiency (or gain from trade) while being incentive compatible, individually rational and budget balanced. In this paper we consider gain from trade which is harder to approximate than social welfare. We consider a variety of feedback scenarios and distinguish the cases where the mechanism posts one price and when it can post different prices for buyer and seller. We show several surprising results about the separation between the different scenarios. In particular we show that (a) it is impossible to achieve sublinear $\alpha$-regret for any $\alpha<2$, (b) but with full feedback sublinear $2$-regret is achievable (c) with a single price and partial feedback one cannot get sublinear $\alpha$ regret for any constant $\alpha$ (d) nevertheless, posting two prices even with one-bit feedback achieves sublinear $2$-regret, and (e) there is a provable separation in the $2$-regret bounds between full and partial feedback.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2021

Competitive Equilibria with Unequal Budgets: Supporting Arbitrary Pareto Optimal Allocations

We consider a market setting of agents with additive valuations over heterogeneous divisible resources. Agents are assigned a budget of tokens (possibly unequal budgets) they can use to obtain resources; leftover tokens are worthless. We show how to support any Pareto efficient allocation in equilibrium, using anonymous resource prices and agent specific budgets. We also give computationally efficient algorithms for those tasks. In particular, this allows us to support the Rawlsian max-min allocation.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2021

(Almost Full) EFX Exists for Four Agents (and Beyond)

The existence of EFX allocations is a major open problem in fair division, even for additive valuations. The current state of the art is that no setting where EFX allocations are impossible is known, and EFX is known to exist for ($i$) agents with identical valuations, ($ii$) 2 agents, ($iii$) 3 agents with additive valuations, ($iv$) agents with one of two additive valuations and ($v$) agents with two-valued instances. It is also known that EFX exists if one can leave $n-1$ items unallocated, where $n$ is the number of agents. We develop new techniques that allow us to push the boundaries of the enigmatic EFX problem beyond these known results, and, arguably, to simplify proofs of earlier results. Our main results are ($i$) every setting with 4 additive agents admits an EFX allocation that leaves at most a single item unallocated, ($ii$) every setting with $n$ additive valuations has an EFX allocation with at most $n-2$ unallocated items. Moreover, all of our results extend beyond additive valuations to all nice cancelable valuations (a new class, including additive, unit-demand, budget-additive and multiplicative valuations, among others). Furthermore, using our new techniques, we show that previous results for additive valuations extend to nice cancelable valuations.

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↗

arXiv2019

Combinatorial Auctions with Interdependent Valuations: SOS to the Rescue

We study combinatorial auctions with interdependent valuations. In such settings, each agent $i$ has a private signal $s_i$ that captures her private information, and the valuation function of every agent depends on the entire signal profile, ${\bf s}=(s_1,\ldots,s_n)$. The literature in economics shows that the interdependent model gives rise to strong impossibility results, and identifies assumptions under which optimal solutions can be attained. The computer science literature provides approximation results for simple single-parameter settings (mostly single item auctions, or matroid feasibility constraints). Both bodies of literature focus largely on valuations satisfying a technical condition termed {\em single crossing} (or variants thereof). We consider the class of {\em submodular over signals} (SOS) valuations (without imposing any single-crossing type assumption), and provide the first welfare approximation guarantees for multi-dimensional combinatorial auctions, achieved by universally ex-post IC-IR mechanisms. Our main results are: $(i)$ 4-approximation for any single-parameter downward-closed setting with single-dimensional signals and SOS valuations; $(ii)$ 4-approximation for any combinatorial auction with multi-dimensional signals and {\em separable}-SOS valuations; and $(iii)$ $(k+3)$- and $(2\log(k)+4)$-approximation for any combinatorial auction with single-dimensional signals, with $k$-sized signal space, for SOS and strong-SOS valuations, respectively. All of our results extend to a parameterized version of SOS, $d$-SOS, while losing a factor that depends on $d$.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2018

Flow Equilibria via Online Surge Pricing

We explore issues of dynamic supply and demand in ride sharing services such as Lyft and Uber, where demand fluctuates over time and geographic location. We seek to maximize social welfare which depends on taxicab and passenger locations, passenger valuations for service, and the distances between taxicabs and passengers. Our only means of control is to set surge prices, then taxicabs and passengers maximize their utilities subject to these prices. We study two related models: a continuous passenger-taxicab setting, similar to the Wardrop model, and a discrete passenger-taxicab setting. In the continuous setting, every location is occupied by a set of infinitesimal strategic taxicabs and a set of infinitesimal non-strategic passengers. In the discrete setting every location is occupied by a set of strategic agents, taxicabs and passengers, passengers have differing values for service. We expand the continuous model to a time-dependent setting and study the corresponding online environment. Surge prices are in passenger-taxicab equilibrium if there exists a min cost flow that moves taxicabs about such that (a) every taxicab follows a best response, (b) all strategic passengers at $v$ with value above the surge price $r_v$ for $v$, are served and (c) no strategic passengers with value below $r_v$ are served (non-strategic infinitesimal passengers are always served). This paper computes surge prices such that resulting passenger-taxicab equilibrium maximizes social welfare, and the computation of such surge prices is in poly time. Moreover, it is a dominant strategy for passengers to reveal their true values. We seek to maximize social welfare in the online environment, and derive tight competitive ratio bounds to this end. Our online algorithms make use of the surge prices computed over time and geographic location, inducing successive passenger-taxicab equilibria.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2018

Interdependent Values without Single-Crossing

We consider a setting where an auctioneer sells a single item to $n$ potential agents with {\em interdependent values}. That is, each agent has her own private signal, and the valuation of each agent is a known function of all $n$ private signals. This captures settings such as valuations for artwork, oil drilling rights, broadcast rights, and many more. In the interdependent value setting, all previous work has assumed a so-called {\sl single-crossing condition}. Single-crossing means that the impact of agent $i$'s private signal, $s_i$, on her own valuation is greater than the impact of $s_i$ on the valuation of any other agent. It is known that without the single-crossing condition an efficient outcome cannot be obtained. We study welfare maximization for interdependent valuations through the lens of approximation. We show that, in general, without the single-crossing condition, one cannot hope to approximate the optimal social welfare any better than the approximation given by assigning the item to a random bidder. Consequently, we introduce a relaxed version of single-crossing, {\sl $c$-single-crossing}, parameterized by $c\geq 1$, which means that the impact of $s_i$ on the valuation of agent $i$ is at least $1/c$ times the impact of $s_i$ on the valuation of any other agent ($c=1$ is single-crossing). Using this parameterized notion, we obtain a host of positive results. We propose a prior-free deterministic mechanism that gives an $(n-1)c$-approximation guarantee to welfare. We then show that a random version of the proposed mechanism gives a prior-free universally truthful $2c$-approximation to the optimal welfare for any concave $c$-single crossing setting (and a $2\sqrt{n}c^{3/2}$-approximation in the absence of concavity). We extend this mechanism to a universally truthful mechanism that gives $O(c^2)$-approximation to the optimal revenue.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2018

The Invisible Hand of Dynamic Market Pricing

Walrasian prices, if they exist, have the property that one can assign every buyer some bundle in her demand set, such that the resulting assignment will maximize social welfare. Unfortunately, this assumes carefully breaking ties amongst different bundles in the buyer demand set. Presumably, the shopkeeper cleverly convinces the buyer to break ties in a manner consistent with maximizing social welfare. Lacking such a shopkeeper, if buyers arrive sequentially and simply choose some arbitrary bundle in their demand set, the social welfare may be arbitrarily bad. In the context of matching markets, we show how to compute dynamic prices, based upon the current inventory, that guarantee that social welfare is maximized. Such prices are set without knowing the identity of the next buyer to arrive. We also show that this is impossible in general (e.g., for coverage valuations), but consider other scenarios where this can be done. We further extend our results to Bayesian and bounded rationality models.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2018

Prompt Scheduling for Selfish Agents

We give a prompt online mechanism for minimizing the sum of [weighted] completion times. This is the first prompt online algorithm for the problem. When such jobs are strategic agents, delaying scheduling decisions makes little sense. Moreover, the mechanism has a particularly simple form of an anonymous menu of options.

cs.DS↗

arXiv2017

Makespan Minimization via Posted Prices

We consider job scheduling settings, with multiple machines, where jobs arrive online and choose a machine selfishly so as to minimize their cost. Our objective is the classic makespan minimization objective, which corresponds to the completion time of the last job to complete. The incentives of the selfish jobs may lead to poor performance. To reconcile the differing objectives, we introduce posted machine prices. The selfish job seeks to minimize the sum of its completion time on the machine and the posted price for the machine. Prices may be static (i.e., set once and for all before any arrival) or dynamic (i.e., change over time), but they are determined only by the past, assuming nothing about upcoming events. Obviously, such schemes are inherently truthful. We consider the competitive ratio: the ratio between the makespan achievable by the pricing scheme and that of the optimal algorithm. We give tight bounds on the competitive ratio for both dynamic and static pricing schemes for identical, restricted, related, and unrelated machine settings. Our main result is a dynamic pricing scheme for related machines that gives a constant competitive ratio, essentially matching the competitive ratio of online algorithms for this setting. In contrast, dynamic pricing gives poor performance for unrelated machines. This lower bound also exhibits a gap between what can be achieved by pricing versus what can be achieved by online algorithms.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2015

On Voting and Facility Location

We study mechanisms for candidate selection that seek to minimize the social cost, where voters and candidates are associated with points in some underlying metric space. The social cost of a candidate is the sum of its distances to each voter. Some of our work assumes that these points can be modeled on a real line, but other results of ours are more general. A question closely related to candidate selection is that of minimizing the sum of distances for facility location. The difference is that in our setting there is a fixed set of candidates, whereas the large body of work on facility location seems to consider every point in the metric space to be a possible candidate. This gives rise to three types of mechanisms which differ in the granularity of their input space (voting, ranking and location mechanisms). We study the relationships between these three classes of mechanisms. While it may seem that Black's 1948 median algorithm is optimal for candidate selection on the line, this is not the case. We give matching upper and lower bounds for a variety of settings. In particular, when candidates and voters are on the line, our universally truthful spike mechanism gives a [tight] approximation of two. When assessing candidate selection mechanisms, we seek several desirable properties: (a) efficiency (minimizing the social cost) (b) truthfulness (dominant strategy incentive compatibility) and (c) simplicity (a smaller input space). We quantify the effect that truthfulness and simplicity impose on the efficiency.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2015

The Temp Secretary Problem

We consider a generalization of the secretary problem where contracts are temporary, and for a fixed duration. This models online hiring of temporary employees, or online auctions for re-usable resources. The problem is related to the question of Finding a large independent set in a random unit interval graph.

cs.DS↗

arXiv2015

Pricing Online Decisions: Beyond Auctions

We consider dynamic pricing schemes in online settings where selfish agents generate online events. Previous work on online mechanisms has dealt almost entirely with the goal of maximizing social welfare or revenue in an auction settings. This paper deals with quite general settings and minimizing social costs. We show that appropriately computed posted prices allow one to achieve essentially the same performance as the best online algorithm. This holds in a wide variety of settings. Unlike online algorithms that learn about the event, and then make enforceable decisions, prices are posted without knowing the future events or even the current event, and are thus inherently dominant strategy incentive compatible. In particular we show that one can give efficient posted price mechanisms for metrical task systems, some instances of the $k$-server problem, and metrical matching problems. We give both deterministic and randomized algorithms. Such posted price mechanisms decrease the social cost dramatically over selfish behavior where no decision incurs a charge. One alluring application of this is reducing the social cost of free parking exponentially.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2013

A Labeling Approach to Incremental Cycle Detection

In the \emph{incremental cycle detection} problem arcs are added to a directed acyclic graph and the algorithm has to report if the new arc closes a cycle. One seeks to minimize the total time to process the entire sequence of arc insertions, or until a cycle appears. In a recent breakthrough, Bender, Fineman, Gilbert and Tarjan \cite{BeFiGiTa11} presented two different algorithms, with time complexity $O(n^2 \log n)$ and $O(m \cdot \min \{m^{1/2}, n^{2/3} \})$, respectively. In this paper we introduce a new technique for incremental cycle detection that allows us to obtain both bounds (up to a logarithmic factor). Furthermore, our approach seems more amiable for distributed implementation.

cs.DS↗