arXiv subjects

Elliot Anshelevich

Publications and source records attributed to Elliot Anshelevich.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Hotelling-Downs with Facility Synergy: The Mall Effect

We consider a variation of the classic Hotelling-Downs model with the addition of facility synergies. Unlike in the classic model, where clients always use the facility closest to them, we study clients who prefer locations with many facilities to those with few facilities while simultaneously attempting to minimize their distance as well. We show that, in contrast with the classic model, Nash equilibria for our setting always exist, and, in fact, there always exists a Nash equilibrium such that the sum of client costs equals the cost of the optimal solution. Our main result is a bound of $\frac{225}{64}\approx 3.516$ on the Price of Anarchy for our model, showing that, although the client behavior is more complex in our model (and often more realistic depending on the application), the cost of Nash equilibrium solutions still cannot be much worse than the cost of the optimal facility placement.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Strategyproof Facility Location and Committee Selection with Mixed Max and Sum Agent Types

We study strategic facility location, in which $n$ agents are located in an arbitrary metric space, and the goal is to choose $k$ facilities to minimize the total agent cost. The agents can have two types of individual cost functions: max-type where the agent wants to minimize the maximum distance from themselves to any chosen facility, or sum-type where the agent wants to minimize the average distance to the chosen facilities. The agents are self-interested, however, and both the agent location and the agent type may be private information. We provide deterministic strategyproof mechanisms for this setting, and prove bounds on their approximation ratio as compared with the solution minimizing the total agent cost. When agent types are private but their locations are known, we prove that an approximation of $\left(3 -\frac{2}{k}\right)$ is always possible, and a better approximation of $\left(\frac{2}{1-k+\sqrt{k^2-k+1}}-1\right)$ is achievable when we know the {\em fraction} of the agents with each type, but not necessarily the type of each individual agent. These bounds hold for arbitrary $k$ and arbitrary metric distances. When agent locations are private, we instead focus on the line metric, and show that a simple generalization of the median mechanism results in an approximation ratio of 3, even for large $k$ and arbitrary mixes of agent types. Our results show the importance of collecting information about agent types vs about their locations, and show that it is possible to produce good outcomes even without such information.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Strategic Facility Location with Limited Liars

We study Nash equilibria in strategic facility location games where clients are located in an arbitrary metric space. Specifically, there are $n$ clients, and the goal is to choose a facility from a set of given locations, so that the total distance from the clients to the facility is as small as possible. While some of the clients are always truthful, $k$ of them are strategic, and will lie about their location if it benefits them. We quantify how the fraction of strategic clients affects the existence and quality of Nash equilibrium and strong equilibrium solutions, and note that even for relatively large $k$, the properties of these solutions can be much better than the results of fully strategyproof mechanisms. For Nash equilibrium, we show that it always exists, and the price of stability is very close to 1. More importantly, we prove that all Nash equilibria are within a factor of at most $\frac{n+2k}{n-2k}$ from the optimum solution, and that this price of anarchy bound is almost tight. While strong equilibrium may not exist for this setting, we prove that it always exists for line metrics, and its cost is at most $\frac{n+k}{n-k}$ times that of optimum.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2025

Low Cost, Fair, and Representative Committees in a Metric Space

We study the problem of selecting a representative committee of $k$ agents from a collection of $n$ agents in a common metric space. This problem is related to choosing $k$ facilities in facility location and $k$-median problems. However, unlike in more traditional facility location where each agent only cares about the closest selected facility, in the settings we consider each agent desires that all selected committee members are close to them. More precisely, we look at the sum objective, in which the goal is to minimize the total distance from all agents to all members of the chosen committee. We show that it is always possible to find a committee which is both low-cost according to this objective, and also fair according to many existing notions of fairness and proportionality defined for clustering settings. Moreover, we introduce a new desirable axiom for representative committees we call NORP, which prevents over-representation of any subset of agents. While all existing algorithms for fair committee selection do not satisfy this intuitive property, we provide new algorithms which form simultaneously low-cost, fair, and NORP solutions, thus showing that it is always possible to form low-cost, fair, and representative committees for our settings.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2025

Compatibility of Max and Sum Objectives for Committee Selection and $k$-Facility Location

We study a version of the metric facility location problem (or, equivalently, variants of the committee selection problem) in which we must choose $k$ facilities in an arbitrary metric space to serve some set of clients $C$. We consider four different objectives, where each client $i\in C$ attempts to minimize either the sum or the maximum of its distance to the chosen facilities, and where the overall objective either considers the sum or the maximum of the individual client costs. Rather than optimizing a single objective at a time, we study how compatible these objectives are with each other, and show the existence of solutions which are simultaneously close-to-optimum for any pair of the above objectives. Our results show that when choosing a set of facilities or a representative committee, it is often possible to form a solution which is good for several objectives at the same time, instead of sacrificing one desideratum to achieve another.

cs.DS↗

arXiv2024

Metric Distortion of Line-up Elections: The Right Person for the Right Job

We provide mechanisms and new metric distortion bounds for line-up elections. In such elections, a set of $n$ voters, $m$ candidates, and $\ell$ positions are all located in a metric space. The goal is to choose a set of candidates and assign them to different positions, so as to minimize the total cost of the voters. The cost of each voter consists of the distances from itself to the chosen candidates (measuring how much the voter likes the chosen candidates, or how similar it is to them), as well as the distances from the candidates to the positions they are assigned to (measuring the fitness of the candidates for their positions). Our mechanisms, however, do not know the exact distances, and instead produce good outcomes while only using a smaller amount of information, resulting in small distortion. We consider several different types of information: ordinal voter preferences, ordinal position preferences, and knowing the exact locations of candidates and positions, but not those of voters. In each of these cases, we provide constant distortion bounds, thus showing that only a small amount of information is enough to form outcomes close to optimum in line-up elections.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2024

Metric Distortion under Group-Fair Objectives

We consider a voting problem in which a set of agents have metric preferences over a set of alternatives, and are also partitioned into disjoint groups. Given information about the preferences of the agents and their groups, our goal is to decide an alternative to approximately minimize an objective function that takes the groups of agents into account. We consider two natural group-fair objectives known as Max-of-Avg and Avg-of-Max which are different combinations of the max and the average cost in and out of the groups. We show tight bounds on the best possible distortion that can be achieved by various classes of mechanisms depending on the amount of information they have access to. In particular, we consider group-oblivious full-information mechanisms that do not know the groups but have access to the exact distances between agents and alternatives in the metric space, group-oblivious ordinal-information mechanisms that again do not know the groups but are given the ordinal preferences of the agents, and group-aware mechanisms that have full knowledge of the structure of the agent groups and also ordinal information about the metric space.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2023

Improved Metric Distortion via Threshold Approvals

We consider a social choice setting in which agents and alternatives are represented by points in a metric space, and the cost of an agent for an alternative is the distance between the corresponding points in the space. The goal is to choose a single alternative to (approximately) minimize the social cost (cost of all agents) or the maximum cost of any agent, when only limited information about the preferences of the agents is given. Previous work has shown that the best possible distortion one can hope to achieve is $3$ when access to the ordinal preferences of the agents is given, even when the distances between alternatives in the metric space are known. We improve upon this bound of $3$ by designing deterministic mechanisms that exploit a bit of cardinal information. We show that it is possible to achieve distortion $1+\sqrt{2}$ by using the ordinal preferences of the agents, the distances between alternatives, and a threshold approval set per agent that contains all alternatives for whom her cost is within an appropriately chosen factor of her cost for her most-preferred alternative. We show that this bound is the best possible for any deterministic mechanism in general metric spaces, and also provide improved bounds for the fundamental case of a line metric.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2022

Optimizing Multiple Simultaneous Objectives for Voting and Facility Location

We study the classic facility location setting, where we are given $n$ clients and $m$ possible facility locations in some arbitrary metric space, and want to choose a location to build a facility. The exact same setting also arises in spatial social choice, where voters are the clients and the goal is to choose a candidate or outcome, with the distance from a voter to an outcome representing the cost of this outcome for the voter (e.g., based on their ideological differences). Unlike most previous work, we do not focus on a single objective to optimize (e.g., the total distance from clients to the facility, or the maximum distance, etc.), but instead attempt to optimize several different objectives simultaneously. More specifically, we consider the $l$-centrum family of objectives, which includes the total distance, max distance, and many others. We present tight bounds on how well any pair of such objectives (e.g., max and sum) can be simultaneously approximated compared to their optimum outcomes. In particular, we show that for any such pair of objectives, it is always possible to choose an outcome which simultaneously approximates both objectives within a factor of $1+\sqrt{2}$, and give a precise characterization of how this factor improves as the two objectives being optimized become more similar. For $q>2$ different centrum objectives, we show that it is always possible to approximate all $q$ of these objectives within a small constant, and that this constant approaches 3 as $q\rightarrow \infty$. Our results show that when optimizing only a few simultaneous objectives, it is always possible to form an outcome which is a significantly better than 3 approximation for all of these objectives.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2021

The Distortion of Distributed Metric Social Choice

We consider a social choice setting with agents that are partitioned into disjoint groups, and have metric preferences over a set of alternatives. Our goal is to choose a single alternative aiming to optimize various objectives that are functions of the distances between agents and alternatives in the metric space, under the constraint that this choice must be made in a distributed way: The preferences of the agents within each group are first aggregated into a representative alternative for the group, and then these group representatives are aggregated into the final winner. Deciding the winner in such a way naturally leads to loss of efficiency, even when complete information about the metric space is available. We provide a series of (mostly tight) bounds on the distortion of distributed mechanisms for variations of well-known objectives, such as the (average) total cost and the maximum cost, and also for new objectives that are particularly appropriate for this distributed setting and have not been studied before.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2021

Distortion in Social Choice Problems: The First 15 Years and Beyond

The notion of distortion in social choice problems has been defined to measure the loss in efficiency -- typically measured by the utilitarian social welfare, the sum of utilities of the participating agents -- due to having access only to limited information about the preferences of the agents. We survey the most significant results of the literature on distortion from the past 15 years, and highlight important open problems and the most promising avenues of ongoing and future work.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2020

Representative Proxy Voting

We study a model of proxy voting where the candidates, voters, and proxies are all located on the real line, and instead of voting directly, each voter delegates its vote to the closest proxy. The goal is to find a set of proxies that is $θ$-representative, which entails that for any voter located anywhere on the line, its favorite candidate is within a distance $θ$ of the favorite candidate of its closest proxy. This property guarantees a strong form of representation as the set of voters is not required to be fixed in advance, or even be finite. We show that for candidates located on a line, an optimal proxy arrangement can be computed in polynomial time. Moreover, we provide upper and lower bounds on the number of proxies required to form a $θ$-representative set, thus showing that a relatively small number of proxies is enough to capture the preferences of any set of voters. An additional beneficial property of a $θ$-representative proxy arrangement is that for strict-Condorcet voting rules, the outcome of proxy voting is similarly close to the outcome of direct voting.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2020

Forming better stable solutions in Group Formation Games inspired by Internet Exchange Points (IXPs)

We study a coordination game motivated by the formation of Internet Exchange Points (IXPs), in which agents choose which facilities to join. Joining the same facility as other agents you communicate with has benefits, but different facilities have different costs for each agent. Thus, the players wish to join the same facilities as their "friends", but this is balanced by them not wanting to pay the cost of joining a facility. We first show that the Price of Stability ($PoS$) of this game is at most 2, and more generally there always exists an $α$-approximate equilibrium with cost at most $\frac{2}α$ of optimum. We then focus on how better stable solutions can be formed. If we allow agents to pay their neighbors to prevent them from deviating (i.e., a player $i$ voluntarily pays another player $j$ so that $j$ joins the same facility), then we provide a payment scheme which stabilizes the solution with minimum social cost $s^*$, i.e. PoS is 1. In our main technical result, we consider how much a central coordinator would have to pay the players in order to form good stable solutions. Let $Δ$ denote the total amount of payments needed to be paid to the players in order to stabilize $s^*$, i.e., these are payments that a player would lose if they changed their strategy from the one in $s^*$. We prove that there is a tradeoff between $Δ$ and the Price of Stability: $\fracΔ{cost(s^*)} \le 1 - \frac{2}{5} PoS$. Thus when there are no good stable solutions, only a small amount of extra payment is needed to stabilize $s^*$; and when good stable solutions already exist (i.e., $PoS$ is small), then we should be happy with those solutions instead. Finally, we consider the computational complexity of finding the optimum solution $s^*$, and design a polynomial time $O(\log n)$ approximation algorithm for this problem.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2019

Awareness of Voter Passion Greatly Improves the Distortion of Metric Social Choice

We develop new voting mechanisms for the case when voters and candidates are located in an arbitrary unknown metric space, and the goal is to choose a candidate minimizing social cost: the total distance from the voters to this candidate. Previous work has often assumed that only ordinal preferences of the voters are known (instead of their true costs), and focused on minimizing distortion: the quality of the chosen candidate as compared with the best possible candidate. In this paper, we instead assume that a (very small) amount of information is known about the voter preference strengths, not just about their ordinal preferences. We provide mechanisms with much better distortion when this extra information is known as compared to mechanisms which use only ordinal information. We quantify tradeoffs between the amount of information known about preference strengths and the achievable distortion. We further provide advice about which type of information about preference strengths seems to be the most useful. Finally, we conclude by quantifying the ideal candidate distortion, which compares the quality of the chosen outcome with the best possible candidate that could ever exist, instead of only the best candidate that is actually in the running.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2018

Ordinal Approximation for Social Choice, Matching, and Facility Location Problems given Candidate Positions

In this work we consider general facility location and social choice problems, in which sets of agents $\mathcal{A}$ and facilities $\mathcal{F}$ are located in a metric space, and our goal is to assign agents to facilities (as well as choose which facilities to open) in order to optimize the social cost. We form new algorithms to do this in the presence of only {\em ordinal information}, i.e., when the true costs or distances from the agents to the facilities are {\em unknown}, and only the ordinal preferences of the agents for the facilities are available. The main difference between our work and previous work in this area is that while we assume that only ordinal information about agent preferences in known, we know the exact locations of the possible facilities $\mathcal{F}$. Due to this extra information about the facilities, we are able to form powerful algorithms which have small {\em distortion}, i.e., perform almost as well as omniscient algorithms but use only ordinal information about agent preferences. For example, we present natural social choice mechanisms for choosing a single facility to open with distortion of at most 3 for minimizing both the total and the median social cost; this factor is provably the best possible. We analyze many general problems including matching, $k$-center, and $k$-median, and present black-box reductions from omniscient approximation algorithms with approximation factor $β$ to ordinal algorithms with approximation factor $1+2β$; doing this gives new ordinal algorithms for many important problems, and establishes a toolkit for analyzing such problems in the future.

cs.MA↗

arXiv2017

Utilitarians Without Utilities: Maximizing Social Welfare for Graph Problems using only Ordinal Preferences - Full Version

We consider ordinal approximation algorithms for a broad class of utility maximization problems for multi-agent systems. In these problems, agents have utilities for connecting to each other, and the goal is to compute a maximum-utility solution subject to a set of constraints. We represent these as a class of graph optimization problems, including matching, spanning tree problems, TSP, maximum weight planar subgraph, and many others. We study these problems in the ordinal setting: latent numerical utilities exist, but we only have access to ordinal preference information, i.e., every agent specifies an ordering over the other agents by preference. We prove that for the large class of graph problems we identify, ordinal information is enough to compute solutions which are close to optimal, thus demonstrating there is no need to know the underlying numerical utilities. For example, for problems in this class with bounded degree $b$ a simple ordinal greedy algorithm always produces a ($b+1$)-approximation; we also quantify how the quality of ordinal approximation depends on the sparsity of the resulting graphs. In particular, our results imply that ordinal information is enough to obtain a 2-approximation for Maximum Spanning Tree; a 4-approximation for Max Weight Planar Subgraph; a 2-approximation for Max-TSP; and a 2-approximation for various Matching problems.

cs.MA↗

arXiv2017

Tradeoffs Between Information and Ordinal Approximation for Bipartite Matching

We study ordinal approximation algorithms for maximum-weight bipartite matchings. Such algorithms only know the ordinal preferences of the agents/nodes in the graph for their preferred matches, but must compete with fully omniscient algorithms which know the true numerical edge weights (utilities). %instead of only their relative orderings. Ordinal approximation is all about being able to produce good results with only limited information. Because of this, one important question is how much better the algorithms can be as the amount of information increases. To address this question for forming high-utility matchings between agents in $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{Y}$, we consider three ordinal information types: when we know the preference order of only nodes in $\mathcal{X}$ for nodes in $\mathcal{Y}$, when we know the preferences of both $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{Y}$, and when we know the total order of the edge weights in the entire graph, although not the weights themselves. We also consider settings where only the top preferences of the agents are known to us, instead of their full preference orderings. We design new ordinal approximation algorithms for each of these settings, and quantify how well such algorithms perform as the amount of information given to them increases.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2017

Envy-Free Pricing in Large Markets: Approximating Revenue and Welfare

We study the classic setting of envy-free pricing, in which a single seller chooses prices for its many items, with the goal of maximizing revenue once the items are allocated. Despite the large body of work addressing such settings, most versions of this problem have resisted good approximation factors for maximizing revenue; this is true even for the classic unit-demand case. In this paper we study envy-free pricing with unit-demand buyers, but unlike previous work we focus on large markets: ones in which the demand of each buyer is infinitesimally small compared to the size of the overall market. We assume that the buyer valuations for the items they desire have a nice (although reasonable) structure, i.e., that the aggregate buyer demand has a monotone hazard rate and that the values of every buyer type come from the same support. For such large markets, our main contribution is a 1.88 approximation algorithm for maximizing revenue, showing that good pricing schemes can be computed when the number of buyers is large. We also give a (e,2)-bicriteria algorithm that simultaneously approximates both maximum revenue and welfare, thus showing that it is possible to obtain both good revenue and welfare at the same time. We further generalize our results by relaxing some of our assumptions, and quantify the necessary tradeoffs between revenue and welfare in our setting. Our results are the first known approximations for large markets, and crucially rely on new lower bounds which we prove for the revenue-maximizing prices.

cs.GT↗