[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/3580507.3597755acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesecConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

On the Connection between Greedy Algorithms and Imperfect Rationality

Published: 07 July 2023 Publication History

Abstract

The design of algorithms or protocols that are able to align the goals of the planner with the selfish interests of the agents involved in these protocols is of paramount importance in almost every decentralized setting (such as, computer networks, markets, etc.) as shown by the rich literature in Mechanism Design. Recently, huge interest has been devoted to the design of mechanisms for imperfectly rational agents, i.e., mechanisms for which agents are able to easily grasp that there is no action different from following the protocol that would satisfy their interests better. This work has culminated in the definition of Obviously Strategyproof (OSP) Mechanisms, that have been shown to capture the incentives of agents without contingent reasoning skills.
Without an understanding of the algorithmic nature of OSP mechanisms, it is hard to assess how well these mechanisms can satisfy the goals of the planner. For the case of binary allocation problems and agents whose private type is a single number, recent work has shown that a generalization of greedy completely characterizes OSP. In this work, we strengthen the connection between greedy and OSP by providing a characterization of OSP mechanisms for all optimization problems involving these single-parameter agents. Specifically, we prove that OSP mechanisms must essentially work as follows: they either greedily look for agents with "better" types and allocate them larger outcomes; or reverse greedily look for agents with "worse" types and allocate them smaller outcomes; or, finally, split the domain of agents in "good" and "bad" types, and subsequently proceed in a reverse greedy fashion for the former and greedily for the latter. We further demonstrate how to use this characterization to give bounds on the approximation guarantee of OSP mechanisms for the well known scheduling related machines problem.

References

[1]
M. Adamczyk, A. Borodin, D. Ferraioli, B. de Keijzer, and S. Leonardi. 2015. Sequential Posted Price Mechanisms with Correlated Valuations. In WINE 2015. 1--15.
[2]
Marek Adamczyk and Michał Włodarczyk. 2018. Random order contention resolution schemes. In 2018 IEEE 59th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS). IEEE, 790--801.
[3]
Aditya Akella, Srinivasan Seshan, Richard Karp, Scott Shenker, and Christos Papadimitriou. 2002. Selfish behavior and stability of the Internet: A game-theoretic analysis of TCP. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 32, 4 (2002), 117--130.
[4]
Aaron Archer and Éva Tardos. 2001a. Truthful mechanisms for one-parameter agents. In Proceedings 42nd IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, 482--491.
[5]
Aaron Archer and Éva Tardos. 2001b. Truthful Mechanisms for One-Parameter Agents. In 42nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2001, 14--17 October 2001, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA. IEEE Computer Society, 482--491.
[6]
R. P. Arribillaga, J. Massó, and A. Neme. 2019. All Sequential Allotment Rules Are Obviously Strategy-proof. (2019).
[7]
R. P. Arribillaga, J. Massó, and A. Neme. 2020. On Obvious Strategy-proofness and Single-peakedness. Journal of Economic Theory (2020).
[8]
Itai Ashlagi and Yannai A. Gonczarowski. 2018. Stable matching mechanisms are not obviously strategy-proof. Journal of Economic Theory 177 (2018), 405--425.
[9]
Moshe Babaioff, Liad Blumrosen, Shaddin Dughmi, and Yaron Singer. 2017. Posting prices with unknown distributions. ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation (TEAC) 5, 2 (2017), 1--20.
[10]
M. Babaioff, N. Immorlica, B. Lucier, and S M. Weinberg. 2014. A Simple and Approximately Optimal Mechanism for an Additive Buyer. In FOCS 2014. 21--30.
[11]
Sophie Bade and Yannai A. Gonczarowski. 2017. Gibbard-Satterthwaite Success Stories and Obvious Strategyproofness. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA) (EC '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 565.
[12]
Jeremy Bulow and Paul Klemperer. 1996. Auctions Versus Negotiations. The American Economic Review 86, 1 (1996), 180--194.
[13]
Lijun Chen, Steven H Low, and John C Doyle. 2007. Contention control: A game-theoretic approach. In 2007 46th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. IEEE, 3428--3434.
[14]
Jonathan Chiu and Thorsten Koeppl. 2019. Incentive compatibility on the blockchain. In Social design. Springer, 323--335.
[15]
Giorgos Christodoulou, Vasilis Gkatzelis, and Daniel Schoepflin. 2022. Optimal Deterministic Clock Auctions and Beyond. In 13th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference, ITCS 2022, January 31 - February 3, 2022, Berkeley, CA, USA (LIPIcs, Vol. 215), Mark Braverman (Ed.). Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 49:1--49:23.
[16]
George Christodoulou, Elias Koutsoupias, and Annamária Kovács. 2021. On the Nisan-Ronen conjecture. In 62nd IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2021, Denver, CO, USA, February 7--10, 2022. IEEE, 839--850.
[17]
George Christodoulou, Elias Koutsoupias, and Annamária Kovács. 2023. A proof of the Nisan-Ronen conjecture. In 55th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing.
[18]
J. Correa, P. Foncea, R. Hoeksma, T. Oosterwijk, and T. Vredeveld. 2017. Posted Price Mechanisms for a Random Stream of Customers. In EC 2017. 169--186.
[19]
Amit Daniely, Michael Schapira, and Gal Shahaf. 2015. Inapproximability of Truthful Mechanisms via Generalizations of the VC Dimension. In Proceedings of the Forty-Seventh Annual ACM on Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2015, Portland, OR, USA, June 14--17, 2015, Rocco A. Servedio and Ronitt Rubinfeld (Eds.). ACM, 401--408.
[20]
Bart de Keijzer, Maria Kyropoulou, and Carmine Ventre. 2020. Obviously Strategyproof Single-Minded Combinatorial Auctions. In ICALP. 71:1--71:17.
[21]
Paul Dütting, Vasilis Gkatzelis, and Tim Roughgarden. 2017. The Performance of Deferred-Acceptance Auctions. Math. Oper. Res. 42, 4 (2017), 897--914.
[22]
A. Eden, M. Feldman, O. Friedler, I. Talgam-Cohen, and S. M. Weinberg. 2017. A Simple and Approximately Optimal Mechanism for a Buyer with Complements. In EC 2017. 323--323.
[23]
M. Feldman, A. Fiat, and A. Roytman. 2017. Makespan Minimization via Posted Prices. In EC 2017. 405--422.
[24]
Michal Feldman, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Nick Gravin, and Daniel Schoepflin. 2022. Bayesian and Randomized Clock Auctions. CoRR abs/2202.09291 (2022). arXiv:2202.09291 https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.09291
[25]
Moran Feldman, Ola Svensson, and Rico Zenklusen. 2016. Online contention resolution schemes. In Proceedings of the twenty-seventh annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms. SIAM, 1014--1033.
[26]
Diodato Ferraioli, Adrian Meier, Paolo Penna, and Carmine Ventre. 2022. New Constructions of Obviously Strategyproof Mechanisms. Mathematics of Operations Research (2022).
[27]
Diodato Ferraioli, Paolo Penna, and Carmine Ventre. 2021. Two-Way Greedy: Algorithms for Imperfect Rationality. In Web and Internet Economics - 17th International Conference, WINE 2021, Potsdam, Germany, December 14--17, 2021, Proceedings (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 13112). Springer, 3--21.
[28]
Diodato Ferraioli and Carmine Ventre. 2023. On the Connection between Greedy Algorithms and Imperfect Rationality. CoRR abs/2302.13641 (2023).
[29]
Jason D Hartline and Tim Roughgarden. 2009. Simple versus optimal mechanisms. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM conference on Electronic commerce. 225--234.
[30]
Shengwu Li. 2017. Obviously Strategy-Proof Mechanisms. American Economic Review 107, 11 (November 2017), 3257--87.
[31]
Andrew Mackenzie. 2018. A revelation principle for obviously strategy-proof implementation. Research Memorandum 014. Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
[32]
Paul Milgrom and Paul Robert Milgrom. 2004. Putting auction theory to work. Cambridge University Press.
[33]
P. Milgrom and I. Segal. 2020. Clock Auctions and Radio Spectrum Reallocation. Journal of Political Economy (2020).
[34]
Noam Nisan, Tim Roughgarden, Eva Tardos, and Vijay Vazirani (Eds.). 2017. Algorithmic Game Theory.
[35]
Noam Nisan, Michael Schapira, Gregory Valiant, and Aviv Zohar. 2011. Best-Response Mechanisms. In ICS. 155--165.
[36]
Marek Pycia and Peter Troyan. 2019. Obvious Dominance and Random Priority. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (Phoenix, AZ, USA) (EC '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1.
[37]
Hal R Varian. 2007. Position auctions. international Journal of industrial Organization 25, 6 (2007), 1163--1178.

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
EC '23: Proceedings of the 24th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation
July 2023
1253 pages
ISBN:9798400701047
DOI:10.1145/3580507
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 07 July 2023

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. obvious strategyproofness
  2. mechanism design
  3. machine scheduling

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

EC '23
Sponsor:
EC '23: 24th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation
July 9 - 12, 2023
London, United Kingdom

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 664 of 2,389 submissions, 28%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 165
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)135
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)20
Reflects downloads up to 12 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media