Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Tzeh Yuan Neoh

Publications and source records attributed to Tzeh Yuan Neoh.

16 recordsLinked to original sources

Closing Gaps in Online Fair Division

We study the online fair division of indivisible items, where items arrive one at a time and must be allocated immediately and irrevocably. We address three central open questions in the literature. First, we show that for every $n\ge 2$ agents, every fixed $k\ge 1$, and every $α\in(0,1]$, no online algorithm can guarantee $α$-PROP$k$ against an adaptive adversary. This remains true even when the total number of goods is known in advance, all values lie in $[0,1]$, and every good is positively valued by at most two agents. The impossibility extends to a broad range of standard envy-based, proportionality-based, and share-based fairness notions. We also establish an analogous impossibility for chores. Second, in the setting with predictions, a lightweight form of future information, the maximum item value, was previously known to guarantee only $1/n$-PROP1, leaving open whether the dependence on $n$ is necessary. We give a deterministic $19/30$-PROP1 algorithm against adaptive adversaries that does not require knowing the total number of goods. Given an additional upper bound $κ\in[2,n]$ on the number of agents who value any good positively, the guarantee improves to $\max \{ 19/30, n/(n+κ) \}$. The guarantee remains a positive constant under any fixed one-sided prediction error below one. When predictions are exact and the total number of goods $m\ge n\log n$ is known in advance, a deterministic algorithm achieves the same $19/30$-PROP1 factor together with $O(\sqrt{m\log n/n})$ maximum additive envy after normalizing each agent's values by their maximum item value. Third, against a non-adaptive adversary, we determine the tight high-probability PROP1 guarantee of the classical Like rule, which assigns each good uniformly among the agents who value it positively. Its guarantee improves when fewer agents value the same good, unlike uniform random allocation.

cs.GT↗

Strengthening Proportionality in Participatory Budgeting with Additive Utilities

Proportional representation is a central goal in participatory budgeting, where voters select public projects subject to a shared budget. Full justified representation (FJR) accounts for groups whose members may value different projects, but computing an FJR outcome is strongly NP-hard for additive utilities. We show that FJR up to one project can be achieved in polynomial time for arbitrary nonnegative additive utilities and project costs. Our approach extends Residual-Budget Greedy and satisfies a stronger fractional axiom that can also be verified in polynomial time. For approval utilities, this axiom coincides with FJR+, providing exact FJR in that setting. We further show that every feasible completion of the algorithm's selected set preserves the representation guarantee, providing flexibility in allocating the remaining budget. In particular, we give a completion that ensures priceability at the original budget. For unit-cost projects, we strengthen the representation guarantee to the Droop quota and combine it with priceability whenever there are enough positively valued projects to fill the budget.

cs.GT↗

Online Fair Division with Additional Information

We study the problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods to agents in an online setting, where goods arrive sequentially and must be allocated irrevocably. Focusing on the popular fairness notions of envy-freeness, proportionality, and maximin share fairness (and their approximate variants), we investigate how access to future information changes what guarantees are achievable. Without any information, we prove strong impossibility results even for approximate fairness. With normalization information (agents' total values), we provide an algorithm that achieves stronger fairness guarantees than previously known results, and show matching impossibilities for stronger notions. With frequency predictions (value multisets without order), we design a meta-algorithm that lifts a broad class of offline ''share-based'' guarantees to the online setting, matching the best-known offline bounds. Finally, we provide learning-augmented variants of both models: under noisy totals or noisy frequency predictions, our guarantees are robust and degrade gracefully with the error parameters.

cs.GT↗

Approximate Proportionality in Online Fair Division

We study the online fair division problem, where indivisible goods arrive sequentially and must be allocated immediately and irrevocably. Prior work establishes strong impossibility results for approximating classic notions such as envy-freeness up to one good (EF1) and maximin share (MMS) in this setting, but the approximability of proportionality up to one good (PROP1) has remained unresolved. We resolve this gap in two steps. First, we show that three natural greedy allocation rules (standard baselines in fair division) fail to guarantee any multiplicative approximation to PROP1 against an adaptive adversary. These limitations motivate two relaxations: (i) restricting attention to a non-adaptive adversary, and (ii) incorporating coarse predictions in the spirit of learning-augmented algorithms. Under a non-adaptive adversary, we show that the uniform random allocation achieves a meaningful PROP1 approximation with high probability, and this guarantee is essentially tight for this approach; moreover, when item values are sufficiently small, the allocation is near-PROP1 with high probability. Finally, given maximum item value (MIV) predictions, we design an online algorithm that achieves robust approximation guarantees for PROP1, and degrades gracefully under one-sided prediction error. In contrast, we show that EF1, MMS, and PROPX remain inapproximable even with perfect MIV predictions.

cs.GT↗

Efficient Ensemble Selection from Binary and Pairwise Feedback

Organizations increasingly deploy multiple AI systems across task domains, but selecting a small, high-performing ensemble can require costly model calls, benchmark runs, and human evaluation. We study this selection problem as a distributional variant of multiwinner voting: tasks are drawn from an unknown domain distribution, each task induces feedback over candidate experts, and a committee's value on a task is determined by its best-performing member. We analyze both binary feedback, for tasks with correct/incorrect outcomes, and pairwise feedback, for tasks where candidate outputs are compared by preference. In the binary setting, the induced objective is coverage. We give exhaustive-elicitation baselines and matching worst-case query lower bounds, and we design a failure-conditioned greedy algorithm that preserves the standard $(1-1/e)$ guarantee while obtaining instance-dependent query savings. In the pairwise setting, we study $θ$-winning committees. We show that full-information optimization admits a PTAS but no EPTAS under Gap-ETH, and that the objective is monotone but not submodular. This motivates a weighted ordinal coverage relaxation, which is submodular and supports a failure-conditioned greedy oracle under pairwise feedback. We then convert this oracle back into $θ$-type guarantees through finite-family auditing or a minimax wrapper. We also provide small-scale LLM experiments illustrating the predicted query savings and the role of complementarity in committee selection.

cs.GT↗

Online Allocation with Unknown Shared Supply

Many real-world resource allocation systems, such as humanitarian logistics and vaccine distribution, must preposition limited supply across multiple locations before demand is realized while stockouts incur irreversible service losses. To study this, we introduce the Online Shared Supply Allocation (OSSA) problem, a stateful online model in which a central hub allocates a finite, unknown supply to multiple sites facing sequential demand under fixed-charge transportation costs and lost-sales penalties. Unlike classical make-to-stock or make-to-order inventory models, OSSA precludes backlogging and replenishment only hedges against future demand. To tackle OSSA, we propose a deterministic threshold-proportional policy GPA and prove that it achieves a $4/3$-approximation to the offline optimum up to an additive term independent of the total supply. We complement this with matching lower bounds showing that the $4/3$ ratio is tight and that the additive-error dependence is unavoidable, even for randomized algorithms that know the total supply upfront. Finally, we develop a learning-augmented extension to GPA that principally incorporates imperfect forecasts (e.g., from human experts or ML models) commonly available in practice, enabling us to exploit high-quality advice while being robust against arbitrary bad ones. Synthetic and real-world experiments show that GPA outperforms natural baselines with global supply is scarce.

cs.AI↗

Incentive-Aware AI Safety via Strategic Resource Allocation: A Stackelberg Security Games Perspective

As AI systems grow more capable and autonomous, ensuring their safety and reliability requires not only model-level alignment but also strategic oversight of the humans and institutions involved in their development and deployment. Existing safety frameworks largely treat alignment as a static optimization problem (e.g., tuning models to desired behavior) while overlooking the dynamic, adversarial incentives that shape how data are collected, how models are evaluated, and how they are ultimately deployed. We propose a new perspective on AI safety grounded in Stackelberg Security Games (SSGs): a class of game-theoretic models designed for adversarial resource allocation under uncertainty. By viewing AI oversight as a strategic interaction between defenders (auditors, evaluators, and deployers) and attackers (malicious actors, misaligned contributors, or worst-case failure modes), SSGs provide a unifying framework for reasoning about incentive design, limited oversight capacity, and adversarial uncertainty across the AI lifecycle. We illustrate how this framework can inform (1) training-time auditing against data/feedback poisoning, (2) pre-deployment evaluation under constrained reviewer resources, and (3) robust multi-model deployment in adversarial environments. This synthesis bridges algorithmic alignment and institutional oversight design, highlighting how game-theoretic deterrence can make AI oversight proactive, risk-aware, and resilient to manipulation.

cs.AI↗

Neuro Symbolic Knowledge Reasoning for Procedural Video Question Answering

In this work we present Knowledge Module Learning (KML) to understand and reason over procedural tasks that requires models to learn structured and compositional procedural knowledge. KML is a neurosymbolic framework that learns relation categories within a knowledge graph as neural knowledge modules and composes them into executable reasoning programs generated by large language models (LLMs). Each module encodes a specific procedural relation capturing how each entity type such as tools are related to steps, purpose of each tool, and steps of each task. Given a question conditioned on a task shown in a video, then KML performs multistep reasoning with transparent, traceable intermediate states. Our theoretical analysis demonstrated two desired properties of KML. KML satisfy strong optimal conditions for modelling KG relations as neural mappings, providing strong foundations for generalizable procedural reasoning. It also shows a bound on the expected error when it performs multistep reasoning. To evaluate this model, we construct a large procedural knowledge graph (PKG) consisting of diverse instructional domains by integrating the COIN instructional video dataset, and COIN ontology, commonsense relations from ConceptNet, and structured extractions from LLMs, followed by expert verification. We then generate question and answer pairs by applying graph traversal templates over the PKG, constructing the PKR-QA benchmark for procedural knowledge reasoning. Experiments show that KML improves structured reasoning performance while providing interpretable step-by-step traces, outperforming LLM-only and black-box neural baselines. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/LUNAProject22/KML.

cs.CV↗

The Cost of EFX: Generalized-Mean Welfare and Complexity Dichotomies with Few Surplus Items

Envy-freeness up to any good (EFX) is a central fairness notion for allocating indivisible goods, yet its existence is unresolved in general. In the setting with few surplus items, where the number of goods exceeds the number of agents by a small constant (at most three), EFX allocations are guaranteed to exist, shifting the focus from existence to efficiency and computation. We study how EFX interacts with generalized-mean ($p$-mean) welfare, which subsumes commonly-studied utilitarian ($p=1$), Nash ($p=0$), and egalitarian ($p \rightarrow -\infty$) objectives. We establish sharp complexity dichotomies at $p=0$: for any fixed $p \in (0,1]$, both deciding whether EFX can attain the global $p$-mean optimum and computing an EFX allocation maximizing $p$-mean welfare are NP-hard, even with at most three surplus goods; in contrast, for any fixed $p \leq 0$, we give polynomial-time algorithms that optimize $p$-mean welfare within the space of EFX allocations and efficiently certify when EFX attains the global optimum. We further quantify the welfare loss of enforcing EFX via the price of fairness framework, showing that for $p > 0$, the loss can grow linearly with the number of agents, whereas for $p \leq 0$, it is bounded by a constant depending on the surplus (and for Nash welfare it vanishes asymptotically). Finally we show that requiring Pareto-optimality alongside EFX is NP-hard (and becomes $Σ_2^P$-complete for a stronger variant of EFX). Overall, our results delineate when EFX is computationally costly versus structurally aligned with welfare maximization in the setting with few surplus items.

cs.GT↗

Fraud-Proof Revenue Division on Subscription Platforms

We study a model of subscription-based platforms where users pay a fixed fee for unlimited access to content, and creators receive a share of the revenue. Existing approaches to detecting fraud predominantly rely on machine learning methods, engaging in an ongoing arms race with bad actors. We explore revenue division mechanisms that inherently disincentivize manipulation. We formalize three types of manipulation-resistance axioms and examine which existing rules satisfy these. We show that a mechanism widely used by streaming platforms, not only fails to prevent fraud, but also makes detecting manipulation computationally intractable. We also introduce a novel rule, ScaledUserProp, that satisfies all three manipulation-resistance axioms. Finally, experiments with both real-world and synthetic streaming data support ScaledUserProp as a fairer alternative compared to existing rules.

cs.GT↗

Fairness in Repeated Matching: A Maximin Perspective

We study a sequential decision-making model where a set of items is repeatedly matched to the same set of agents over multiple rounds. The objective is to determine a sequence of matchings that either maximizes the utility of the least advantaged agent at the end of all rounds (optimal) or at the end of every individual round (anytime optimal). We investigate the computational challenges associated with finding (anytime) optimal outcomes and demonstrate that these problems are generally computationally intractable. However, we provide approximation algorithms, fixed-parameter tractable algorithms, and identify several special cases whereby the problem(s) can be solved efficiently. Along the way, we also establish characterizations of Pareto-optimal/maximum matchings, which may be of independent interest to works in matching theory and house allocation.

cs.GT↗

Not in My Backyard! Temporal Voting Over Public Chores

We study a temporal voting model where voters have dynamic preferences over a set of public chores -- projects that benefit society, but impose individual costs on those affected by their implementation. We investigate the computational complexity of optimizing utilitarian and egalitarian welfare. Our results show that while optimizing the former is computationally straightforward, minimizing the latter is computationally intractable, even in very restricted cases. Nevertheless, we identify several settings where this problem can be solved efficiently, either exactly or by an approximation algorithm. We also examine the effects of enforcing temporal fairness and its impact on social welfare, and analyze the competitive ratio of online algorithms. We then explore the strategic behavior of agents, providing insights into potential malfeasance in such decision-making environments. Finally, we discuss a range of fairness measures and their suitability for our setting.

cs.GT↗

Understanding EFX Allocations: Counting and Variants

Envy-freeness up to any good (EFX) is a popular and important fairness property in the fair allocation of indivisible goods, of which its existence in general is still an open question. In this work, we investigate the problem of determining the minimum number of EFX allocations for a given instance, arguing that this approach may yield valuable insights into the existence and computation of EFX allocations. We focus on restricted instances where the number of goods slightly exceeds the number of agents, and extend our analysis to weighted EFX (WEFX) and a novel variant of EFX for general monotone valuations, termed EFX+. In doing so, we identify the transition threshold for the existence of allocations satisfying these fairness notions. Notably, we resolve open problems regarding WEFX by proving polynomial-time computability under binary additive valuations, and establishing the first constant-factor approximation for two agents.

cs.GT↗

Temporal Elections: Welfare, Strategyproofness, and Proportionality

We investigate a model of sequential decision-making where a single alternative is chosen at each round. We focus on two objectives -- utilitarian welfare (Util) and egalitarian welfare (Egal) -- and consider the computational complexity of maximizing these objectives, as well as their compatibility with strategyproofness and proportionality. We observe that maximizing Util is easy, but the corresponding decision problem for Egal is NP-complete even in restricted cases. We complement this hardness result for Egal with parameterized complexity analysis and an approximation algorithm. Additionally, we show that, while a mechanism that outputs an outcome that maximizes Util is strategyproof, all deterministic mechanisms for computing outcomes that maximize Egal fail a very weak variant of strategyproofness, called non-obvious manipulability (NOM). However, we show that when agents have non-empty approval sets at each timestep, choosing an Egal-maximizing outcome while breaking ties lexicographically satisfies NOM. Regarding proportionality, we prove that a proportional (PROP) outcome can be computed efficiently, but finding an outcome that maximizes Util while guaranteeing PROP is NP-hard. We also derive upper and lower bounds on the (strong) price of proportionality with respect to Util and Egal. Some of our results extend to $p$-mean welfare measures other than Egal and Util.

cs.GT↗

An Improved Algorithm for Sparse Instances of SAT

We show that the CNF satisfiability problem (SAT) can be solved in time $O^*(1.1199^{(d-2)n})$, where $d$ is either the maximum number of occurrences of any variable or the average number of occurrences of all variables if no variable occurs only once. This improves upon the known upper bound of $O^*(1.1279^{(d-2)n})$ by Wahlstr$\ddot{\text{o}}$m (SAT 2005) and $O^*(1.1238^{(d-2)n})$ by Peng and Xiao (IJCAI 2023). For $d\leq 4$, our algorithm is better than previous results. Our main technical result is an algorithm that runs in $O^*(1.1199^n)$ for 3-occur-SAT, a restricted instance of SAT where all variables have at most 3 occurrences. Through deeper case analysis and a reduction rule that allows us to resolve many variables under a relatively broad criteria, we are able to circumvent the bottlenecks in previous algorithms.

cs.DS↗

Temporal Fair Division of Indivisible Items

We study a fair division model where indivisible items arrive sequentially, and must be allocated immediately and irrevocably. Previous work on online fair division has shown impossibility results in achieving approximate envy-freeness under these constraints. In contrast, we consider an informed setting where the algorithm has complete knowledge of future items, and aim to ensure that the cumulative allocation at each round satisfies approximate envy-freeness -- which we define as temporal envy-freeness up to one item (TEF1). We focus on settings where items can be exclusively goods or exclusively chores. For goods, while TEF1 allocations may not always exist, we identify several special cases where they do -- two agents, two item types, generalized binary valuations, unimodal preferences -- and provide polynomial-time algorithms for these cases. We also prove that determining the existence of a TEF1 allocation is NP-hard. For chores, we establish analogous results for the special cases, but present a slightly weaker intractability result. We also establish the incompatibility between TEF1 and Pareto-optimality, with the implication that it is intractable to find a TEF1 allocation that maximizes any $p$-mean welfare, even for two agents.

cs.GT↗