228,393 research outputs found
Allocation in Practice
How do we allocate scarcere sources? How do we fairly allocate costs? These
are two pressing challenges facing society today. I discuss two recent projects
at NICTA concerning resource and cost allocation. In the first, we have been
working with FoodBank Local, a social startup working in collaboration with
food bank charities around the world to optimise the logistics of collecting
and distributing donated food. Before we can distribute this food, we must
decide how to allocate it to different charities and food kitchens. This gives
rise to a fair division problem with several new dimensions, rarely considered
in the literature. In the second, we have been looking at cost allocation
within the distribution network of a large multinational company. This also has
several new dimensions rarely considered in the literature.Comment: To appear in Proc. of 37th edition of the German Conference on
Artificial Intelligence (KI 2014), Springer LNC
Dividing bads under additive utilities
We compare the Egalitarian rule (aka Egalitarian Equivalent) and the Competitive rule (aka Comeptitive Equilibrium with Equal Incomes) to divide bads (chores). They are both welfarist: the competitive disutility profile(s) are the critical points of their Nash product on the set of efficient feasible profiles. The C rule is Envy Free, Maskin Monotonic, and has better incentives properties than the E rule. But, unlike the E rule, it can be wildly multivalued, admits no selection continuous in the utility and endowment parameters, and is harder to compute. Thus in the division of bads, unlike that of goods, no rule normatively dominates the other
Competitive division of a mixed manna
A mixed manna contains goods (that everyone likes) and bads (that everyone dislikes),
as well as items that are goods to some agents, but bads or satiated to others.
If all items are goods and utility functions are homogeneous of degree 1 and concave
(and monotone), the competitive division maximizes the Nash product of utilities
(Gale–Eisenberg): hence it is welfarist (determined by the set of feasible utility profiles),
unique, continuous, and easy to compute.
We show that the competitive division of a mixed manna is still welfarist. If the zero
utility profile is Pareto dominated, the competitive profile is strictly positive and still
uniquely maximizes the product of utilities. If the zero profile is unfeasible (for instance,
if all items are bads), the competitive profiles are strictly negative and are the
critical points of the product of disutilities on the efficiency frontier. The latter allows
for multiple competitive utility profiles, from which no single-valued selection can be
continuous or resource monotonic.
Thus the implementation of competitive fairness under linear preferences in interactive
platforms like SPLIDDIT will be more difficult when the manna contains bads
that overwhelm the goods
Efficient Algorithms for Envy-Free Stick Division With Fewest Cuts
Given a set of n sticks of various (not necessarily different) lengths, what
is the largest length so that we can cut k equally long pieces of this length
from the given set of sticks? We analyze the structure of this problem and show
that it essentially reduces to a single call of a selection algorithm; we thus
obtain an optimal linear-time algorithm.
This algorithm also solves the related envy-free stick-division problem,
which Segal-Halevi, Hassidim, and Aumann (AAMAS, 2015) recently used as their
central primitive operation for the first discrete and bounded envy-free cake
cutting protocol with a proportionality guarantee when pieces can be put to
waste.Comment: v3 adds more context about the proble
- …