Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Haris Aziz

Publications and source records attributed to Haris Aziz.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
arXiv2017

A Polynomial-time Algorithm to Achieve Extended Justified Representation

We consider a committee voting setting in which each voter approves of a subset of candidates and based on the approvals, a target number of candidates are to be selected. In particular we focus on the axiomatic property called extended justified representation (EJR). Although a committee satisfying EJR is guaranteed to exist, the computational complexity of finding such a committee has been an open problem and explicitly mentioned in multiple recent papers. We settle the complexity of finding a committee satisfying EJR by presenting a polynomial-time algorithm for the problem. Our algorithmic approach may be useful for constructing other voting rules in multi-winner voting.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2017

Computational Complexity of Testing Proportional Justified Representation

We consider a committee voting setting in which each voter approves of a subset of candidates and based on the approvals, a target number of candidates are selected. Aziz et al. (2015) proposed two representation axioms called justified representation and extended justified representation. Whereas the former can be tested as well as achieved in polynomial time, the latter property is coNP-complete to test and no polynomial-time algorithm is known to achieve it. Interestingly, S{á}nchez-Fern{á}ndez et~al. (2016) proposed an intermediate property called proportional justified representation that admits a polynomial-time algorithm to achieve. The complexity of testing proportional justified representation has remained an open problem. In this paper, we settle the complexity by proving that testing proportional justified representation is coNP-complete. We complement the complexity result by showing that the problem admits efficient algorithms if any of the following parameters are bounded: (1) number of voters (2) number of candidates (3) maximum number of candidates approved by a voter (4) maximum number of voters approving a given candidate.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2017

The Adjusted Winner Procedure: Characterizations and Equilibria

The Adjusted Winner procedure is an important fair division mechanism proposed by Brams and Taylor for allocating goods between two parties. It has been used in practice for divorce settlements and analyzing political disputes. Assuming truthful declaration of the valuations, it computes an allocation that is envy-free, equitable and Pareto optimal. We show that Adjusted Winner admits several elegant characterizations, which further shed light on the outcomes reached with strategic agents. We find that the procedure may not admit pure Nash equilibria in either the discrete or continuous variants, but is guaranteed to have $ε$-Nash equilibria for each $ε$ > 0. Moreover, under informed tie-breaking, exact pure Nash equilibria always exist, are Pareto optimal, and their social welfare is at least 3/4 of the optimal.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2017

The Condorcet Principle for Multiwinner Elections: From Shortlisting to Proportionality

We study two notions of stability in multiwinner elections that are based on the Condorcet criterion. The first notion was introduced by Gehrlein: A committee is stable if each committee member is preferred to each non-member by a (possibly weak) majority of voters. The second notion is called local stability (introduced in this paper): A size-$k$ committee is locally stable in an election with $n$ voters if there is no candidate $c$ and no group of more than $\frac{n}{k+1}$ voters such that each voter in this group prefers $c$ to each committee member. We argue that Gehrlein-stable committees are appropriate for shortlisting tasks, and that locally stable committees are better suited for applications that require proportional representation. The goal of this paper is to analyze these notions in detail, explore their compatibility with notions of proportionality, and investigate the computational complexity of related algorithmic tasks.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2016

Participation Incentives in Randomized Social Choice

When aggregating preferences of agents via voting, two desirable goals are to identify outcomes that are Pareto optimal and to incentivize agents to participate in the voting process. We consider participation notions as formalized by Brandl, Brandt, and Hofbauer (2015) and study how far efficiency and participation are achievable by randomized social choice functions in particular when agents' preferences are downward lexicographic (DL) or satisfy stochastic dominance (SD). Our results include the followings ones: we prove formal relations between the participation notions with respect to SD and DL and we show that the maximal recursive rule satisfies very strong participation with respect to both SD and DL.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2016

Pareto Optimal Allocation under Uncertain Preferences

The assignment problem is one of the most well-studied settings in social choice, matching, and discrete allocation. We consider the problem with the additional feature that agents' preferences involve uncertainty. The setting with uncertainty leads to a number of interesting questions including the following ones. How to compute an assignment with the highest probability of being Pareto optimal? What is the complexity of computing the probability that a given assignment is Pareto optimal? Does there exist an assignment that is Pareto optimal with probability one? We consider these problems under two natural uncertainty models: (1) the lottery model in which each agent has an independent probability distribution over linear orders and (2) the joint probability model that involves a joint probability distribution over preference profiles. For both of the models, we present a number of algorithmic and complexity results.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2016

Justified Representation in Approval-Based Committee Voting

We consider approval-based committee voting, i.e. the setting where each voter approves a subset of candidates, and these votes are then used to select a fixed-size set of winners (committee). We propose a natural axiom for this setting, which we call justified representation (JR). This axiom requires that if a large enough group of voters exhibits agreement by supporting the same candidate, then at least one voter in this group has an approved candidate in the winning committee. We show that for every list of ballots it is possible to select a committee that provides JR. However, it turns out that several prominent approval-based voting rules may fail to output such a committee. In particular, while Proportional Approval Voting (PAV) always outputs a committee that provides JR, Reweighted Approval Voting (RAV), a tractable approximation to PAV, does not have this property. We then introduce a stronger version of the JR axiom, which we call extended justified representation (EJR), and show that PAV satisfies EJR, while other rules we consider do not; indeed, EJR can be used to characterize PAV within the class of weighted PAV rules. We also consider several other questions related to JR and EJR, including the relationship between JR/EJR and core stability, and the complexity of the associated algorithmic problems.

cs.MA↗
arXiv2016

Stable Matching with Uncertain Linear Preferences

We consider the two-sided stable matching setting in which there may be uncertainty about the agents' preferences due to limited information or communication. We consider three models of uncertainty: (1) lottery model --- in which for each agent, there is a probability distribution over linear preferences, (2) compact indifference model --- for each agent, a weak preference order is specified and each linear order compatible with the weak order is equally likely and (3) joint probability model --- there is a lottery over preference profiles. For each of the models, we study the computational complexity of computing the stability probability of a given matching as well as finding a matching with the highest probability of being stable. We also examine more restricted problems such as deciding whether a certainly stable matching exists. We find a rich complexity landscape for these problems, indicating that the form uncertainty takes is significant.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2016

Interdependent Scheduling Games

We propose a model of interdependent scheduling games in which each player controls a set of services that they schedule independently. A player is free to schedule his own services at any time; however, each of these services only begins to accrue reward for the player when all predecessor services, which may or may not be controlled by the same player, have been activated. This model, where players have interdependent services, is motivated by the problems faced in planning and coordinating large-scale infrastructures, e.g., restoring electricity and gas to residents after a natural disaster or providing medical care in a crisis when different agencies are responsible for the delivery of staff, equipment, and medicine. We undertake a game-theoretic analysis of this setting and in particular consider the issues of welfare maximization, computing best responses, Nash dynamics, and existence and computation of Nash equilibria.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2016

Incompatibility of Efficiency and Strategyproofness in the Random Assignment Setting with Indifferences

A fundamental resource allocation setting is the random assignment problem in which agents express preferences over objects that are then randomly allocated to the agents. In 2001, Bogomolnaia and Moulin presented the probabilistic serial (PS) mechanism that is an anonymous, neutral, Pareto optimal, and weak strategyproof mechanism when the preferences are considered with respect to stochastic dominance. The result holds when agents have strict preferences over individual objects. It has been an open problem whether there exists a mechanism that satisfies the same properties when agents may have indifference among the objects. We show that for this more general domain, there exists no extension of PS that is ex post efficient and weak strategyproof. The result is surprising because it does not even require additional symmetry or fairness conditions such as anonymity, neutrality, or equal treatment of equals. Our result further demonstrates that the lack of weak SD-strategyproofness of the extended PS mechanism of Katta and Sethuraman (2006) is not a design flaw of extended PS but is due to an inherent incompatibility of efficiency and strategyproofness of PS in the full preference domain.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2016

A Discrete and Bounded Envy-free Cake Cutting Protocol for Four Agents

We consider the well-studied cake cutting problem in which the goal is to identify a fair allocation based on a minimal number of queries from the agents. The problem has attracted considerable attention within various branches of computer science, mathematics, and economics. Although, the elegant Selfridge-Conway envy-free protocol for three agents has been known since 1960, it has been a major open problem for the last fifty years to obtain a bounded envy-free protocol for more than three agents. We propose a discrete and bounded envy-free protocol for four agents.

cs.DS↗
arXiv2016

Approximation Algorithms for Max-Min Share Allocations of Indivisible Chores and Goods

We consider Max-min Share (MmS) allocations of items both in the case where items are goods (positive utility) and when they are chores (negative utility). We show that fair allocations of goods and chores have some fundamental connections but differences as well. We prove that like in the case for goods, an MmS allocation does not need to exist for chores and computing an MmS allocation - if it exists - is strongly NP-hard. In view of these non-existence and complexity results, we present a polynomial-time 2-approximation algorithm for MmS fairness for chores. We then introduce a new fairness concept called optimal MmS that represents the best possible allocation in terms of MmS that is guaranteed to exist. For both goods and chores, we use connections to parallel machine scheduling to give (1) an exponential-time exact algorithm and (2) a polynomial-time approximation scheme for computing an optimal MmS allocation when the number of agents is fixed.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2016

A Comment on the Averseness of Random Serial Dictatorship to Stochastic Dominance Efficiency

Random Serial Dictatorship (RSD) is arguably the most well-known and widely used assignment rule. Although it returns an ex post efficient assignment, Bogomolnaia and Moulin (A new solution to the random assignment problem, J. Econ. Theory 100, 295--328) proved that RSD may not be SD-efficient (efficient with respect stochastic dominance). The result raises the following question: under what conditions is RSD not SD-efficient? In this comment, we give a detailed argument that the RSD assignment is not SD-efficient if and only if an ex post assignment exists that is not SD-efficient. Hence RSD can be viewed as being inherently averse to SD-efficiency. The characterization was proved by Manea (2009).

cs.GT↗
arXiv2016

Complexity of Manipulating Sequential Allocation

Sequential allocation is a simple allocation mechanism in which agents are given pre-specified turns and each agents gets the most preferred item that is still available. It has long been known that sequential allocation is not strategyproof. Bouveret and Lang (2014) presented a polynomial-time algorithm to compute a best response of an agent with respect to additively separable utilities and claimed that (1) their algorithm correctly finds a best response, and (2) each best response results in the same allocation for the manipulator. We show that both claims are false via an example. We then show that in fact the problem of computing a best response is NP-complete. On the other hand, the insights and results of Bouveret and Lang (2014) for the case of two agents still hold.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2015

Welfare of Sequential Allocation Mechanisms for Indivisible Goods

Sequential allocation is a simple and attractive mechanism for the allocation of indivisible goods. Agents take turns, according to a policy, to pick items. Sequential allocation is guaranteed to return an allocation which is efficient but may not have an optimal social welfare. We consider therefore the relation between welfare and efficiency. We study the (computational) questions of what welfare is possible or necessary depending on the choice of policy. We also consider a novel control problem in which the chair chooses a policy to improve social welfare.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2015

Characterizing SW-Efficiency in the Social Choice Domain

Recently, Dogan, Dogan and Yildiz (2015) presented a new efficiency notion for the random assignment setting called SW (social welfare)-efficiency and characterized it. In this note, we generalize the characterization for the more general domain of randomized social choice.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2015

Boolean Hedonic Games

We study hedonic games with dichotomous preferences. Hedonic games are cooperative games in which players desire to form coalitions, but only care about the makeup of the coalitions of which they are members; they are indifferent about the makeup of other coalitions. The assumption of dichotomous preferences means that, additionally, each player's preference relation partitions the set of coalitions of which that player is a member into just two equivalence classes: satisfactory and unsatisfactory. A player is indifferent between satisfactory coalitions, and is indifferent between unsatisfactory coalitions, but strictly prefers any satisfactory coalition over any unsatisfactory coalition. We develop a succinct representation for such games, in which each player's preference relation is represented by a propositional formula. We show how solution concepts for hedonic games with dichotomous preferences are characterised by propositional formulas.

cs.GT↗