arXiv subjects

Michal Feldman

Publications and source records attributed to Michal Feldman.

At least 91 records · Page 5Linked to original sources

arXiv2017

Stable Secretaries

We define and study a new variant of the secretary problem. Whereas in the classic setting multiple secretaries compete for a single position, we study the case where the secretaries arrive one at a time and are assigned, in an on-line fashion, to one of multiple positions. Secretaries are ranked according to talent, as in the original formulation, and in addition positions are ranked according to attractiveness. To evaluate an online matching mechanism, we use the notion of blocking pairs from stable matching theory: our goal is to maximize the number of positions (or secretaries) that do not take part in a blocking pair. This is compared with a stable matching in which no blocking pair exists. We consider the case where secretaries arrive randomly, as well as that of an adversarial arrival order, and provide corresponding upper and lower bounds.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2017

A Simple and Approximately Optimal Mechanism for a Buyer with Complements

We consider a revenue-maximizing seller with $m$ heterogeneous items and a single buyer whose valuation $v$ for the items may exhibit both substitutes (i.e., for some $S, T$, $v(S \cup T) < v(S) + v(T)$) and complements (i.e., for some $S, T$, $v(S \cup T) > v(S) + v(T)$). We show that the mechanism first proposed by Babaioff et al. [2014] - the better of selling the items separately and bundling them together - guarantees a $Θ(d)$ fraction of the optimal revenue, where $d$ is a measure on the degree of complementarity. Note that this is the first approximately optimal mechanism for a buyer whose valuation exhibits any kind of complementarity, and extends the work of Rubinstein and Weinberg [2015], which proved that the same simple mechanisms achieve a constant factor approximation when buyer valuations are subadditive, the most general class of complement-free valuations. Our proof is enabled by the recent duality framework developed in Cai et al. [2016], which we use to obtain a bound on the optimal revenue in this setting. Our main technical contributions are specialized to handle the intricacies of settings with complements, and include an algorithm for partitioning edges in a hypergraph. Even nailing down the right model and notion of "degree of complementarity" to obtain meaningful results is of interest, as the natural extensions of previous definitions provably fail.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2017

Correlated and Coarse equilibria of Single-item auctions

We study correlated equilibria and coarse equilibria of simple first-price single-item auctions in the simplest auction model of full information. Nash equilibria are known to always yield full efficiency and a revenue that is at least the second-highest value. We prove that the same is true for all correlated equilibria, even those in which agents overbid -- i.e., bid above their values. Coarse equilibria, in contrast, may yield lower efficiency and revenue. We show that the revenue can be as low as 26% of the second-highest value in a coarse equilibrium, even if agents are assumed not to overbid, and this is tight. We also show that when players do not overbid, the worst-case bound on social welfare at coarse equilibrium improves from 63% of the highest value to 81%, and this bound is tight as well.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2016

The Competition Complexity of Auctions: A Bulow-Klemperer Result for Multi-Dimensional Bidders

A seminal result of Bulow and Klemperer [1989] demonstrates the power of competition for extracting revenue: when selling a single item to $n$ bidders whose values are drawn i.i.d. from a regular distribution, the simple welfare-maximizing VCG mechanism (in this case, a second price-auction) with one additional bidder extracts at least as much revenue in expectation as the optimal mechanism. The beauty of this theorem stems from the fact that VCG is a {\em prior-independent} mechanism, where the seller possesses no information about the distribution, and yet, by recruiting one additional bidder it performs better than any prior-dependent mechanism tailored exactly to the distribution at hand (without the additional bidder). In this work, we establish the first {\em full Bulow-Klemperer} results in {\em multi-dimensional} environments, proving that by recruiting additional bidders, the revenue of the VCG mechanism surpasses that of the optimal (possibly randomized, Bayesian incentive compatible) mechanism. For a given environment with i.i.d. bidders, we term the number of additional bidders needed to achieve this guarantee the environment's {\em competition complexity}. Using the recent duality-based framework of Cai et al. [2016] for reasoning about optimal revenue, we show that the competition complexity of $n$ bidders with additive valuations over $m$ independent, regular items is at most $n+2m-2$ and at least $\log(m)$. We extend our results to bidders with additive valuations subject to downward-closed constraints, showing that these significantly more general valuations increase the competition complexity by at most an additive $m-1$ factor. We further improve this bound for the special case of matroid constraints, and provide additional extensions as well.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2016

Do Capacity Constraints Constrain Coalitions?

We study strong equilibria in symmetric capacitated cost-sharing games. In these games, a graph with designated source $s$ and sink $t$ is given, and each edge is associated with some cost. Each agent chooses strategically an $s$-$t$ path, knowing that the cost of each edge is shared equally between all agents using it. Two variants of cost-sharing games have been previously studied: (i) games where coalitions can form, and (ii) games where edges are associated with capacities; both variants are inspired by real-life scenarios. In this work we combine these variants and analyze strong equilibria (profiles where no coalition can deviate) in capacitated games. This combination gives rise to new phenomena that do not occur in the previous variants. Our contribution is two-fold. First, we provide a topological characterization of networks that always admit a strong equilibrium. Second, we establish tight bounds on the efficiency loss that may be incurred due to strategic behavior, as quantified by the strong price of anarchy (and stability) measures. Interestingly, our results are qualitatively different than those obtained in the analysis of each variant alone, and the combination of coalitions and capacities entails the introduction of more refined topology classes than previously studied.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2016

Simple Mechanisms For Agents With Complements

We study the efficiency of simple auctions in the presence of complements. [DMSW15] introduced the single-bid auction, and showed that it has a price of anarchy (PoA) of $O(\log m)$ for complement-free (i.e., subadditive) valuations. Prior to our work, no non-trivial upper bound on the PoA of single bid auctions was known for valuations exhibiting complements. We introduce a hierarchy over valuations, where levels of the hierarchy correspond to the degree of complementarity, and the PoA of the single bid auction degrades gracefully with the level of the hierarchy. This hierarchy is a refinement of the Maximum over Positive Hypergraphs (MPH) hierarchy [FFIILS15], where the degree of complementarity $d$ is captured by the maximum number of neighbors of a node in the positive hypergraph representation. We show that the price of anarchy of the single bid auction for valuations of level $d$ of the hierarchy is $O(d^2 \log(m/d))$, where $m$ is the number of items. We also establish an improved upper bound of $O(d \log m)$ for a subclass where every hyperedge in the positive hypergraph representation is of size at most 2 (but the degree is still $d$). Finally, we show that randomizing between the single bid auction and the grand bundle auction has a price of anarchy of at most $O(\sqrt{m})$ for general valuations. All of our results are derived via the smoothness framework, thus extend to coarse-correlated equilibria and to Bayes Nash equilibria.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2016

Dynamics of Evolving Social Groups

Exclusive social groups are ones in which the group members decide whether or not to admit a candidate to the group. Examples of exclusive social groups include academic departments and fraternal organizations. In the present paper we introduce an analytic framework for studying the dynamics of exclusive social groups. In our model, every group member is characterized by his opinion, which is represented as a point on the real line. The group evolves in discrete time steps through a voting process carried out by the group's members. Due to homophily, each member votes for the candidate who is more similar to him (i.e., closer to him on the line). An admission rule is then applied to determine which candidate, if any, is admitted. We consider several natural admission rules including majority and consensus. We ask: how do different admission rules affect the composition of the group in the long term? We study both growing groups (where new members join old ones) and fixed-size groups (where new members replace those who quit). Our analysis reveals intriguing phenomena and phase transitions, some of which are quite counterintuitive.

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

On Welfare Approximation and Stable Pricing

We study the power of item-pricing as a tool for approximately optimizing social welfare in a combinatorial market. We consider markets with $m$ indivisible items and $n$ buyers. The goal is to set prices to the items so that, when agents purchase their most demanded sets simultaneously, no conflicts arise and the obtained allocation has nearly optimal welfare. For gross substitutes valuations, it is well known that it is possible to achieve optimal welfare in this manner. We ask: can one achieve approximately efficient outcomes for valuations beyond gross substitutes? We show that even for submodular valuations, and even with only two buyers, one cannot guarantee an approximation better than $Ω(\sqrt{m})$. The same lower bound holds for the class of single-minded buyers as well. Beyond the negative results on welfare approximation, our results have daunting implications on revenue approximation for these valuation classes: in order to obtain good approximation to the collected revenue, one would necessarily need to abandon the common approach of comparing the revenue to the optimal welfare; a fundamentally new approach would be required.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2015

Liquid Price of Anarchy

Incorporating budget constraints into the analysis of auctions has become increasingly important, as they model practical settings more accurately. The social welfare function, which is the standard measure of efficiency in auctions, is inadequate for settings with budgets, since there may be a large disconnect between the value a bidder derives from obtaining an item and what can be liquidated from her. The Liquid Welfare objective function has been suggested as a natural alternative for settings with budgets. Simple auctions, like simultaneous item auctions, are evaluated by their performance at equilibrium using the Price of Anarchy (PoA) measure -- the ratio of the objective function value of the optimal outcome to the worst equilibrium. Accordingly, we evaluate the performance of simultaneous item auctions in budgeted settings by the Liquid Price of Anarchy (LPoA) measure -- the ratio of the optimal Liquid Welfare to the Liquid Welfare obtained in the worst equilibrium. Our main result is that the LPoA for mixed Nash equilibria is bounded by a constant when bidders are additive and items can be divided into sufficiently many discrete parts. Our proofs are robust, and can be extended to achieve similar bounds for simultaneous second price auctions as well as Bayesian Nash equilibria. For pure Nash equilibria, we establish tight bounds on the LPoA for the larger class of fractionally-subadditive valuations. To derive our results, we develop a new technique in which some bidders deviate (surprisingly) toward a non-optimal solution. In particular, this technique does not fit into the smoothness framework.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2015

Truthful Secretaries with Budgets

We study online auction settings in which agents arrive and depart dynamically in a random (secretary) order, and each agent's private type consists of the agent's arrival and departure times, value and budget. We consider multi-unit auctions with additive agents for the allocation of both divisible and indivisible items. For both settings, we devise truthful mechanisms that give a constant approximation with respect to the auctioneer's revenue, under a large market assumption. For divisible items, we devise in addition a truthful mechanism that gives a constant approximation with respect to the liquid welfare --- a natural efficiency measure for budgeted settings introduced by Dobzinski and Paes Leme [ICALP'14]. Our techniques provide high-level principles for transforming offline truthful mechanisms into online ones, with or without budget constraints. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that addresses the non-trivial challenge of combining online settings with budgeted agents.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2015

The Price of Anarchy in Large Games

Game-theoretic models relevant for computer science applications usually feature a large number of players. The goal of this paper is to develop an analytical framework for bounding the price of anarchy in such models. We demonstrate the wide applicability of our framework through instantiations for several well-studied models, including simultaneous single-item auctions, greedy combinatorial auctions, and routing games. In all cases, we identify conditions under which the POA of large games is much better than that of worst-case instances. Our results also give new senses in which simple auctions can perform almost as well as optimal ones in realistic settings.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2014

Combinatorial Auctions via Posted Prices

We study anonymous posted price mechanisms for combinatorial auctions in a Bayesian framework. In a posted price mechanism, item prices are posted, then the consumers approach the seller sequentially in an arbitrary order, each purchasing her favorite bundle from among the unsold items at the posted prices. These mechanisms are simple, transparent and trivially dominant strategy incentive compatible (DSIC). We show that when agent preferences are fractionally subadditive (which includes all submodular functions), there always exist prices that, in expectation, obtain at least half of the optimal welfare. Our result is constructive: given black-box access to a combinatorial auction algorithm A, sample access to the prior distribution, and appropriate query access to the sampled valuations, one can compute, in polytime, prices that guarantee at least half of the expected welfare of A. As a corollary, we obtain the first polytime (in n and m) constant-factor DSIC mechanism for Bayesian submodular combinatorial auctions, given access to demand query oracles. Our results also extend to valuations with complements, where the approximation factor degrades linearly with the level of complementarity.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2014

Reaching Consensus via non-Bayesian Asynchronous Learning in Social Networks

We study the outcomes of information aggregation in online social networks. Our main result is that networks with certain realistic structural properties avoid information cascades and enable a population to effectively aggregate information. In our model, each individual in a network holds a private, independent opinion about a product or idea, biased toward a ground truth. Individuals declare their opinions asynchronously, can observe the stated opinions of their neighbors, and are free to update their declarations over time. Supposing that individuals conform with the majority report of their neighbors, we ask whether the population will eventually arrive at consensus on the ground truth. We show that the answer depends on the network structure: there exist networks for which consensus is unlikely, or for which declarations converge on the incorrect opinion with positive probability. On the other hand, we prove that for networks that are sparse and expansive, the population will converge to the correct opinion with high probability.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2014

A Unifying Hierarchy of Valuations with Complements and Substitutes

We introduce a new hierarchy over monotone set functions, that we refer to as $\mathcal{MPH}$ (Maximum over Positive Hypergraphs). Levels of the hierarchy correspond to the degree of complementarity in a given function. The highest level of the hierarchy, $\mathcal{MPH}$-$m$ (where $m$ is the total number of items) captures all monotone functions. The lowest level, $\mathcal{MPH}$-$1$, captures all monotone submodular functions, and more generally, the class of functions known as $\mathcal{XOS}$. Every monotone function that has a positive hypergraph representation of rank $k$ (in the sense defined by Abraham, Babaioff, Dughmi and Roughgarden [EC 2012]) is in $\mathcal{MPH}$-$k$. Every monotone function that has supermodular degree $k$ (in the sense defined by Feige and Izsak [ITCS 2013]) is in $\mathcal{MPH}$-$(k+1)$. In both cases, the converse direction does not hold, even in an approximate sense. We present additional results that demonstrate the expressiveness power of $\mathcal{MPH}$-$k$. One can obtain good approximation ratios for some natural optimization problems, provided that functions are required to lie in low levels of the $\mathcal{MPH}$ hierarchy. We present two such applications. One shows that the maximum welfare problem can be approximated within a ratio of $k+1$ if all players hold valuation functions in $\mathcal{MPH}$-$k$. The other is an upper bound of $2k$ on the price of anarchy of simultaneous first price auctions. Being in $\mathcal{MPH}$-$k$ can be shown to involve two requirements -- one is monotonicity and the other is a certain requirement that we refer to as $\mathcal{PLE}$ (Positive Lower Envelope). Removing the monotonicity requirement, one obtains the $\mathcal{PLE}$ hierarchy over all non-negative set functions (whether monotone or not), which can be fertile ground for further research.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2014

Welfare and Revenue Guarantees for Competitive Bundling Equilibrium

We study equilibria of markets with $m$ heterogeneous indivisible goods and $n$ consumers with combinatorial preferences. It is well known that a competitive equilibrium is not guaranteed to exist when valuations are not gross substitutes. Given the widespread use of bundling in real-life markets, we study its role as a stabilizing and coordinating device by considering the notion of \emph{competitive bundling equilibrium}: a competitive equilibrium over the market induced by partitioning the goods for sale into fixed bundles. Compared to other equilibrium concepts involving bundles, this notion has the advantage of simulatneous succinctness ($O(m)$ prices) and market clearance. Our first set of results concern welfare guarantees. We show that in markets where consumers care only about the number of goods they receive (known as multi-unit or homogeneous markets), even in the presence of complementarities, there always exists a competitive bundling equilibrium that guarantees a logarithmic fraction of the optimal welfare, and this guarantee is tight. We also establish non-trivial welfare guarantees for general markets, two-consumer markets, and markets where the consumer valuations are additive up to a fixed budget (budget-additive). Our second set of results concern revenue guarantees. Motivated by the fact that the revenue extracted in a standard competitive equilibrium may be zero (even with simple unit-demand consumers), we show that for natural subclasses of gross substitutes valuations, there always exists a competitive bundling equilibrium that extracts a logarithmic fraction of the optimal welfare, and this guarantee is tight. The notion of competitive bundling equilibrium can thus be useful even in markets which possess a standard competitive equilibrium.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2014

Clearing Markets via Bundles

We study algorithms for combinatorial market design problems, where a set of heterogeneous and indivisible objects are priced and sold to potential buyers subject to equilibrium constraints. Extending the CWE notion introduced by Feldman et al. [STOC 2013], we introduce the concept of a Market-Clearing Combinatorial Walrasian Equilibium (MC-CWE) as a natural relaxation of the classical Walrasian equilibrium (WE) solution concept. The only difference between a MC-CWE and a WE is the ability for the seller to bundle the items prior to sale. This innocuous and natural bundling operation imposes a plethora of algorithmic and economic challenges and opportunities. Unlike WE, which is guaranteed to exist only for (gross) substitutes valuations, a MC-CWE always exists. The main algorithmic challenge, therefore, is to design computationally efficient mechanisms that generate MC-CWE outcomes that approximately maximize social welfare. For a variety of valuation classes encompassing substitutes and complements (including super-additive, single-minded and budget-additive valuations), we design polynomial-time MC-CWE mechanisms that provide tight welfare approximation results.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2014

Mixed Strategies in Combinatorial Agency

In many multiagent domains a set of agents exert effort towards a joint outcome, yet the individual effort levels cannot be easily observed. A typical example for such a scenario is routing in communication networks, where the sender can only observe whether the packet reached its destination, but often has no information about the actions of the intermediate routers, which influences the final outcome. We study a setting where a principal needs to motivate a team of agents whose combination of hidden efforts stochastically determines an outcome. In a companion paper we devise and study a basic combinatorial agency model for this setting, where the principal is restricted to inducing a pure Nash equilibrium. Here we study various implications of this restriction. First, we show that, in contrast to the case of observable efforts, inducing a mixed-strategies equilibrium may be beneficial for the principal. Second, we present a sufficient condition for technologies for which no gain can be generated. Third, we bound the principals gain for various families of technologies. Finally, we study the robustness of mixed equilibria to coalitional deviations and the computational hardness of the optimal mixed equilibria.

cs.GT↗