arXiv subjects

Tim Roughgarden

Publications and source records attributed to Tim Roughgarden.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

arXiv2017

Almost Envy-Freeness with General Valuations

The goal of fair division is to distribute resources among competing players in a "fair" way. Envy-freeness is the most extensively studied fairness notion in fair division. Envy-free allocations do not always exist with indivisible goods, motivating the study of relaxed versions of envy-freeness. We study the envy-freeness up to any good (EFX) property, which states that no player prefers the bundle of another player following the removal of any single good, and prove the first general results about this property. We use the leximin solution to show existence of EFX allocations in several contexts, sometimes in conjunction with Pareto optimality. For two players with valuations obeying a mild assumption, one of these results provides stronger guarantees than the currently deployed algorithm on Spliddit, a popular fair division website. Unfortunately, finding the leximin solution can require exponential time. We show that this is necessary by proving an exponential lower bound on the number of value queries needed to identify an EFX allocation, even for two players with identical valuations. We consider both additive and more general valuations, and our work suggests that there is a rich landscape of problems to explore in the fair division of indivisible goods with different classes of player valuations.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2017

Stability and Recovery for Independence Systems

Two genres of heuristics that are frequently reported to perform much better on "real-world" instances than in the worst case are greedy algorithms and local search algorithms. In this paper, we systematically study these two types of algorithms for the problem of maximizing a monotone submodular set function subject to downward-closed feasibility constraints. We consider perturbation-stable instances, in the sense of Bilu and Linial, and precisely identify the stability threshold beyond which these algorithms are guaranteed to recover the optimal solution. Byproducts of our work include the first definition of perturbation-stability for non-additive objective functions, and a resolution of the worst-case approximation guarantee of local search in p-extendible systems.

cs.DS↗

arXiv2017

Online Prediction with Selfish Experts

We consider the problem of binary prediction with expert advice in settings where experts have agency and seek to maximize their credibility. This paper makes three main contributions. First, it defines a model to reason formally about settings with selfish experts, and demonstrates that "incentive compatible" (IC) algorithms are closely related to the design of proper scoring rules. Designing a good IC algorithm is easy if the designer's loss function is quadratic, but for other loss functions, novel techniques are required. Second, we design IC algorithms with good performance guarantees for the absolute loss function. Third, we give a formal separation between the power of online prediction with selfish experts and online prediction with honest experts by proving lower bounds for both IC and non-IC algorithms. In particular, with selfish experts and the absolute loss function, there is no (randomized) algorithm for online prediction-IC or otherwise-with asymptotically vanishing regret.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2016

A PAC Approach to Application-Specific Algorithm Selection

The best algorithm for a computational problem generally depends on the "relevant inputs," a concept that depends on the application domain and often defies formal articulation. While there is a large literature on empirical approaches to selecting the best algorithm for a given application domain, there has been surprisingly little theoretical analysis of the problem. This paper adapts concepts from statistical and online learning theory to reason about application-specific algorithm selection. Our models capture several state-of-the-art empirical and theoretical approaches to the problem, ranging from self-improving algorithms to empirical performance models, and our results identify conditions under which these approaches are guaranteed to perform well. We present one framework that models algorithm selection as a statistical learning problem, and our work here shows that dimension notions from statistical learning theory, historically used to measure the complexity of classes of binary- and real-valued functions, are relevant in a much broader algorithmic context. We also study the online version of the algorithm selection problem, and give possibility and impossibility results for the existence of no-regret learning algorithms.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2016

Private Matchings and Allocations

We consider a private variant of the classical allocation problem: given k goods and n agents with individual, private valuation functions over bundles of goods, how can we partition the goods amongst the agents to maximize social welfare? An important special case is when each agent desires at most one good, and specifies her (private) value for each good: in this case, the problem is exactly the maximum-weight matching problem in a bipartite graph. Private matching and allocation problems have not been considered in the differential privacy literature, and for good reason: they are plainly impossible to solve under differential privacy. Informally, the allocation must match agents to their preferred goods in order to maximize social welfare, but this preference is exactly what agents wish to hide. Therefore, we consider the problem under the relaxed constraint of joint differential privacy: for any agent i, no coalition of agents excluding i should be able to learn about the valuation function of agent i. In this setting, the full allocation is no longer published---instead, each agent is told what good to get. We first show that with a small number of identical copies of each good, it is possible to efficiently and accurately solve the maximum weight matching problem while guaranteeing joint differential privacy. We then consider the more general allocation problem, when bidder valuations satisfy the gross substitutes condition. Finally, we prove that the allocation problem cannot be solved to non-trivial accuracy under joint differential privacy without requiring multiple copies of each type of good.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2016

When Are Welfare Guarantees Robust?

Computational and economic results suggest that social welfare maximization and combinatorial auction design are much easier when bidders' valuations satisfy the "gross substitutes" condition. The goal of this paper is to evaluate rigorously the folklore belief that the main take-aways from these results remain valid in settings where the gross substitutes condition holds only approximately. We show that for valuations that pointwise approximate a gross substitutes valuation (in fact even a linear valuation), optimal social welfare cannot be approximated to within a subpolynomial factor and demand oracles cannot be simulated using a subexponential number of value queries. We then provide several positive results by imposing additional structure on the valuations (beyond gross substitutes), using a more stringent notion of approximation, and/or using more powerful oracle access to the valuations. For example, we prove that the performance of the greedy algorithm degrades gracefully for near-linear valuations with approximately decreasing marginal values, that with demand queries, approximate welfare guarantees for XOS valuations degrade gracefully for valuations that are pointwise close to XOS, and that the performance of the Kelso-Crawford auction degrades gracefully for valuations that are close to various subclasses of gross substitutes valuations.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2016

The Price of Anarchy in Auctions

This survey outlines a general and modular theory for proving approximation guarantees for equilibria of auctions in complex settings. This theory complements traditional economic techniques, which generally focus on exact and optimal solutions and are accordingly limited to relatively stylized settings. We highlight three user-friendly analytical tools: smoothness-type inequalities, which immediately yield approximation guarantees for many auction formats of interest in the special case of complete information and deterministic strategies; extension theorems, which extend such guarantees to randomized strategies, no-regret learning outcomes, and incomplete-information settings; and composition theorems, which extend such guarantees from simpler to more complex auctions. Combining these tools yields tight worst-case approximation guarantees for the equilibria of many widely-used auction formats.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2016

Learning Simple Auctions

We present a general framework for proving polynomial sample complexity bounds for the problem of learning from samples the best auction in a class of "simple" auctions. Our framework captures all of the most prominent examples of "simple" auctions, including anonymous and non-anonymous item and bundle pricings, with either a single or multiple buyers. The technique we propose is to break the analysis of auctions into two natural pieces. First, one shows that the set of allocation rules have large amounts of structure; second, fixing an allocation on a sample, one shows that the set of auctions agreeing with this allocation on that sample have revenue functions with low dimensionality. Our results effectively imply that whenever it's possible to compute a near-optimal simple auction with a known prior, it is also possible to compute such an auction with an unknown prior (given a polynomial number of samples).

cs.LG↗

arXiv2015

The Sample Complexity of Revenue Maximization

In the design and analysis of revenue-maximizing auctions, auction performance is typically measured with respect to a prior distribution over inputs. The most obvious source for such a distribution is past data. The goal is to understand how much data is necessary and sufficient to guarantee near-optimal expected revenue. Our basic model is a single-item auction in which bidders' valuations are drawn independently from unknown and non-identical distributions. The seller is given $m$ samples from each of these distributions "for free" and chooses an auction to run on a fresh sample. How large does m need to be, as a function of the number k of bidders and eps > 0, so that a (1 - eps)-approximation of the optimal revenue is achievable? We prove that, under standard tail conditions on the underlying distributions, m = poly(k, 1/eps) samples are necessary and sufficient. Our lower bound stands in contrast to many recent results on simple and prior-independent auctions and fundamentally involves the interplay between bidder competition, non-identical distributions, and a very close (but still constant) approximation of the optimal revenue. It effectively shows that the only way to achieve a sufficiently good constant approximation of the optimal revenue is through a detailed understanding of bidders' valuation distributions. Our upper bound is constructive and applies in particular to a variant of the empirical Myerson auction, the natural auction that runs the revenue-maximizing auction with respect to the empirical distributions of the samples. Our sample complexity lower bound depends on the set of allowable distributions, and to capture this we introduce alpha-strongly regular distributions, which interpolate between the well-studied classes of regular (alpha = 0) and MHR (alpha = 1) distributions. We give evidence that this definition is of independent interest.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2015

Ironing in the Dark

This paper presents the first polynomial-time algorithm for position and matroid auction environments that learns, from samples from an unknown bounded valuation distribution, an auction with expected revenue arbitrarily close to the maximum possible. In contrast to most previous work, our results apply to arbitrary (not necessarily regular) distributions and the strongest possible benchmark, the Myerson-optimal auction. Learning a near-optimal auction for an irregular distribution is technically challenging because it requires learning the appropriate "ironed intervals," a delicate global property of the distribution.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2015

Communication Complexity (for Algorithm Designers)

This document collects the lecture notes from my course "Communication Complexity (for Algorithm Designers),'' taught at Stanford in the winter quarter of 2015. The two primary goals of the course are: 1. Learn several canonical problems that have proved the most useful for proving lower bounds (Disjointness, Index, Gap-Hamming, etc.). 2. Learn how to reduce lower bounds for fundamental algorithmic problems to communication complexity lower bounds. Along the way, we'll also: 3. Get exposure to lots of cool computational models and some famous results about them --- data streams and linear sketches, compressive sensing, space-query time trade-offs in data structures, sublinear-time algorithms, and the extension complexity of linear programs. 4. Scratch the surface of techniques for proving communication complexity lower bounds (fooling sets, corruption bounds, etc.).

cs.CC↗

arXiv2015

The Pseudo-Dimension of Near-Optimal Auctions

This paper develops a general approach, rooted in statistical learning theory, to learning an approximately revenue-maximizing auction from data. We introduce $t$-level auctions to interpolate between simple auctions, such as welfare maximization with reserve prices, and optimal auctions, thereby balancing the competing demands of expressivity and simplicity. We prove that such auctions have small representation error, in the sense that for every product distribution $F$ over bidders' valuations, there exists a $t$-level auction with small $t$ and expected revenue close to optimal. We show that the set of $t$-level auctions has modest pseudo-dimension (for polynomial $t$) and therefore leads to small learning error. One consequence of our results is that, in arbitrary single-parameter settings, one can learn a mechanism with expected revenue arbitrarily close to optimal from a polynomial number of samples.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2015

Public projects, Boolean functions and the borders of Border's theorem

Border's theorem gives an intuitive linear characterization of the feasible interim allocation rules of a Bayesian single-item environment, and it has several applications in economic and algorithmic mechanism design. All known generalizations of Border's theorem either restrict attention to relatively simple settings, or resort to approximation. This paper identifies a complexity-theoretic barrier that indicates, assuming standard complexity class separations, that Border's theorem cannot be extended significantly beyond the state-of-the-art. We also identify a surprisingly tight connection between Myerson's optimal auction theory, when applied to public project settings, and some fundamental results in the analysis of Boolean functions.

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↗

arXiv2015

Making the Most of Your Samples

We study the problem of setting a price for a potential buyer with a valuation drawn from an unknown distribution $D$. The seller has "data"' about $D$ in the form of $m \ge 1$ i.i.d. samples, and the algorithmic challenge is to use these samples to obtain expected revenue as close as possible to what could be achieved with advance knowledge of $D$. Our first set of results quantifies the number of samples $m$ that are necessary and sufficient to obtain a $(1-ε)$-approximation. For example, for an unknown distribution that satisfies the monotone hazard rate (MHR) condition, we prove that $\tildeΘ(ε^{-3/2})$ samples are necessary and sufficient. Remarkably, this is fewer samples than is necessary to accurately estimate the expected revenue obtained by even a single reserve price. We also prove essentially tight sample complexity bounds for regular distributions, bounded-support distributions, and a wide class of irregular distributions. Our lower bound approach borrows tools from differential privacy and information theory, and we believe it could find further applications in auction theory. Our second set of results considers the single-sample case. For regular distributions, we prove that no pricing strategy is better than $\tfrac{1}{2}$-approximate, and this is optimal by the Bulow-Klemperer theorem. For MHR distributions, we show how to do better: we give a simple pricing strategy that guarantees expected revenue at least $0.589$ times the maximum possible. We also prove that no pricing strategy achieves an approximation guarantee better than $\frac{e}{4} \approx .68$.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2014

Optimal Platform Design

An auction house cannot generally provide the optimal auction technology to every client. Instead it provides one or several auction technologies, and clients select the most appropriate one. For example, eBay provides ascending auctions and "buy-it-now" pricing. For each client the offered technology may not be optimal, but it would be too costly for clients to create their own. We call these mechanisms, which emphasize generality rather than optimality, platform mechanisms. A platform mechanism will be adopted by a client if its performance exceeds that of the client's outside option, e.g., hiring (at a cost) a consultant to design the optimal mechanism. We ask two related questions. First, for what costs of the outside option will the platform be universally adopted? Second, what is the structure of good platform mechanisms? We answer these questions using a novel prior-free analysis framework in which we seek mechanisms that are approximately optimal for every prior.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2014

Tight Error Bounds for Structured Prediction

Structured prediction tasks in machine learning involve the simultaneous prediction of multiple labels. This is typically done by maximizing a score function on the space of labels, which decomposes as a sum of pairwise elements, each depending on two specific labels. Intuitively, the more pairwise terms are used, the better the expected accuracy. However, there is currently no theoretical account of this intuition. This paper takes a significant step in this direction. We formulate the problem as classifying the vertices of a known graph $G=(V,E)$, where the vertices and edges of the graph are labelled and correlate semi-randomly with the ground truth. We show that the prospects for achieving low expected Hamming error depend on the structure of the graph $G$ in interesting ways. For example, if $G$ is a very poor expander, like a path, then large expected Hamming error is inevitable. Our main positive result shows that, for a wide class of graphs including 2D grid graphs common in machine vision applications, there is a polynomial-time algorithm with small and information-theoretically near-optimal expected error. Our results provide a first step toward a theoretical justification for the empirical success of the efficient approximate inference algorithms that are used for structured prediction in models where exact inference is intractable.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2014

Approximately Optimal Mechanism Design: Motivation, Examples, and Lessons Learned

Optimal mechanism design enjoys a beautiful and well-developed theory, and also a number of killer applications. Rules of thumb produced by the field influence everything from how governments sell wireless spectrum licenses to how the major search engines auction off online advertising. There are, however, some basic problems for which the traditional optimal mechanism design approach is ill-suited --- either because it makes overly strong assumptions, or because it advocates overly complex designs. The thesis of this paper is that approximately optimal mechanisms allow us to reason about fundamental questions that seem out of reach of the traditional theory. This survey has three main parts. The first part describes the approximately optimal mechanism design paradigm --- how it works, and what we aim to learn by applying it. The second and third parts of the survey cover two case studies, where we instantiate the general design paradigm to investigate two basic questions. In the first example, we consider revenue maximization in a single-item auction with heterogeneous bidders. Our goal is to understand if complexity --- in the sense of detailed distributional knowledge --- is an essential feature of good auctions for this problem, or alternatively if there are simpler auctions that are near-optimal. The second example considers welfare maximization with multiple items. Our goal here is similar in spirit: when is complexity --- in the form of high-dimensional bid spaces --- an essential feature of every auction that guarantees reasonable welfare? Are there interesting cases where low-dimensional bid spaces suffice?

cs.GT↗