arXiv subjects

Sigal Oren

Publications and source records attributed to Sigal Oren.

24 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2014

Economic Efficiency Requires Interaction

We study the necessity of interaction between individuals for obtaining approximately efficient allocations. The role of interaction in markets has received significant attention in economic thinking, e.g. in Hayek's 1945 classic paper. We consider this problem in the framework of simultaneous communication complexity. We analyze the amount of simultaneous communication required for achieving an approximately efficient allocation. In particular, we consider two settings: combinatorial auctions with unit demand bidders (bipartite matching) and combinatorial auctions with subadditive bidders. For both settings we first show that non-interactive systems have enormous communication costs relative to interactive ones. On the other hand, we show that limited interaction enables us to find approximately efficient allocations.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2013

Pay or Play

We introduce the class of pay or play games, which captures scenarios in which each decision maker is faced with a choice between two actions: one with a fixed payoff and an- other with a payoff dependent on others' selected actions. This is, arguably, the simplest setting that models selection among certain and uncertain outcomes in a multi-agent system. We study the properties of equilibria in such games from both a game-theoretic perspective and a computational perspective. Our main positive result establishes the existence of a semi-strong equilibrium in every such game. We show that although simple, pay of play games contain a large variety of well-studied environments, e.g., vaccination games. We discuss the interesting implications of our results for these environments.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2013

On Discrete Preferences and Coordination

An active line of research has considered games played on networks in which payoffs depend on both a player's individual decision and also the decisions of her neighbors. Such games have been used to model issues including the formation of opinions and the adoption of technology. A basic question that has remained largely open in this area is to consider games where the strategies available to the players come from a fixed, discrete set, and where players may have different intrinsic preferences among the possible strategies. It is natural to model the tension among these different preferences by positing a distance function on the strategy set that determines a notion of "similarity" among strategies; a player's payoff is determined by the distance from her chosen strategy to her preferred strategy and to the strategies chosen by her network neighbors. Even when there are only two strategies available, this framework already leads to natural open questions about a version of the classical Battle of the Sexes problem played on a graph. We develop a set of techniques for analyzing this class of games, which we refer to as discrete preference games. We parametrize the games by the relative extent to which a player takes into account the effect of her preferred strategy and the effect of her neighbors' strategies, allowing us to interpolate between network coordination games and unilateral decision-making. When these two effects are balanced, we show that the price of stability is equal to 1 for any discrete preference game in which the distance function on the strategies is a tree metric; as a special case, this includes the Battle of the Sexes on a graph. We also show that trees form the maximal family of metrics for which the price of stability is 1, and produce a collection of metrics on which the price of stability converges to a tight bound of 2.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2012

The Complexity of Social Coordination

Coordination is a challenging everyday task; just think of the last time you organized a party or a meeting involving several people. As a growing part of our social and professional life goes online, an opportunity for an improved coordination process arises. Recently, Gupta et al. proposed entangled queries as a declarative abstraction for data-driven coordination, where the difficulty of the coordination task is shifted from the user to the database. Unfortunately, evaluating entangled queries is very hard, and thus previous work considered only a restricted class of queries that satisfy safety (the coordination partners are fixed) and uniqueness (all queries need to be satisfied). In this paper we significantly extend the class of feasible entangled queries beyond uniqueness and safety. First, we show that we can simply drop uniqueness and still efficiently evaluate a set of safe entangled queries. Second, we show that as long as all users coordinate on the same set of attributes, we can give an efficient algorithm for coordination even if the set of queries does not satisfy safety. In an experimental evaluation we show that our algorithms are feasible for a wide spectrum of coordination scenarios.

cs.DB↗

arXiv2012

How Bad is Forming Your Own Opinion?

The question of how people form their opinion has fascinated economists and sociologists for quite some time. In many of the models, a group of people in a social network, each holding a numerical opinion, arrive at a shared opinion through repeated averaging with their neighbors in the network. Motivated by the observation that consensus is rarely reached in real opinion dynamics, we study a related sociological model in which individuals' intrinsic beliefs counterbalance the averaging process and yield a diversity of opinions. By interpreting the repeated averaging as best-response dynamics in an underlying game with natural payoffs, and the limit of the process as an equilibrium, we are able to study the cost of disagreement in these models relative to a social optimum. We provide a tight bound on the cost at equilibrium relative to the optimum; our analysis draws a connection between these agreement models and extremal problems that lead to generalized eigenvalues. We also consider a natural network design problem in this setting: which links can we add to the underlying network to reduce the cost of disagreement at equilibrium?

cs.GT↗

arXiv2011

Optimization with Demand Oracles

We study \emph{combinatorial procurement auctions}, where a buyer with a valuation function $v$ and budget $B$ wishes to buy a set of items. Each item $i$ has a cost $c_i$ and the buyer is interested in a set $S$ that maximizes $v(S)$ subject to $Σ_{i\in S}c_i\leq B$. Special cases of combinatorial procurement auctions are classical problems from submodular optimization. In particular, when the costs are all equal (\emph{cardinality constraint}), a classic result by Nemhauser et al shows that the greedy algorithm provides an $\frac e {e-1}$ approximation. Motivated by many papers that utilize demand queries to elicit the preferences of agents in economic settings, we develop algorithms that guarantee improved approximation ratios in the presence of demand oracles. We are able to break the $\frac e {e-1}$ barrier: we present algorithms that use only polynomially many demand queries and have approximation ratios of $\frac 9 8+ε$ for the general problem and $\frac 9 8$ for maximization subject to a cardinality constraint. We also consider the more general class of subadditive valuations. We present algorithms that obtain an approximation ratio of $2+ε$ for the general problem and 2 for maximization subject to a cardinality constraint. We guarantee these approximation ratios even when the valuations are non-monotone. We show that these ratios are essentially optimal, in the sense that for any constant $ε>0$, obtaining an approximation ratio of $2-ε$ requires exponentially many demand queries.

cs.GT↗