29 research outputs found
Online Ascending Auctions for Gradually Expiring Items
In this paper we consider online auction mechanisms for the allocation of M items that are identical to each other except for the fact that they have different expiration times, and each item must be allocated before it expires. Players arrive at different times, and wish to buy one item before their deadline. The main difficulty is that players act "selfishly" and may mis-report their values, deadlines, or arrival times. We begin by showing that the usual notion of truthfulness (where players follow a single dominant strategy) cannot be used in this case, since any (deterministic) truthful auction cannot obtain better than an M-approximation of the social welfare. Therefore, instead of designing auctions in which players should follow a single strategy, we design two auctions that perform well under a wide class of selfish, "semi-myopic", strategies. For every combination of such strategies, the auction is associated with a different algorithm, and so we have a family of "semi-myopic" algorithms. We show that any algorithm in this family obtains a 3-approximation, and by this conclude that our auctions will perform well under any choice of such semi-myopic behaviors. We next turn to provide a game-theoretic justification for acting in such a semi-myopic way. We suggest a new notion of "Set-Nash" equilibrium, where we cannot pin-point a single best-response strategy, but rather only a set of possible best-response strategies. We show that our auctions have a Set-Nash equilibrium which is all semi-myopic, hence guarantees a 3-approximation. We believe that this notion is of independent interest
Sum of Us: Strategyproof Selection from the Selectors
We consider directed graphs over a set of n agents, where an edge (i,j) is
taken to mean that agent i supports or trusts agent j. Given such a graph and
an integer k\leq n, we wish to select a subset of k agents that maximizes the
sum of indegrees, i.e., a subset of k most popular or most trusted agents. At
the same time we assume that each individual agent is only interested in being
selected, and may misreport its outgoing edges to this end. This problem
formulation captures realistic scenarios where agents choose among themselves,
which can be found in the context of Internet search, social networks like
Twitter, or reputation systems like Epinions.
Our goal is to design mechanisms without payments that map each graph to a
k-subset of agents to be selected and satisfy the following two constraints:
strategyproofness, i.e., agents cannot benefit from misreporting their outgoing
edges, and approximate optimality, i.e., the sum of indegrees of the selected
subset of agents is always close to optimal. Our first main result is a
surprising impossibility: for k \in {1,...,n-1}, no deterministic strategyproof
mechanism can provide a finite approximation ratio. Our second main result is a
randomized strategyproof mechanism with an approximation ratio that is bounded
from above by four for any value of k, and approaches one as k grows
Core-competitive Auctions
One of the major drawbacks of the celebrated VCG auction is its low (or zero)
revenue even when the agents have high value for the goods and a {\em
competitive} outcome could have generated a significant revenue. A competitive
outcome is one for which it is impossible for the seller and a subset of buyers
to `block' the auction by defecting and negotiating an outcome with higher
payoffs for themselves. This corresponds to the well-known concept of {\em
core} in cooperative game theory.
In particular, VCG revenue is known to be not competitive when the goods
being sold have complementarities. A bottleneck here is an impossibility result
showing that there is no auction that simultaneously achieves competitive
prices (a core outcome) and incentive-compatibility.
In this paper we try to overcome the above impossibility result by asking the
following natural question: is it possible to design an incentive-compatible
auction whose revenue is comparable (even if less) to a competitive outcome?
Towards this, we define a notion of {\em core-competitive} auctions. We say
that an incentive-compatible auction is -core-competitive if its
revenue is at least fraction of the minimum revenue of a
core-outcome. We study the Text-and-Image setting. In this setting, there is an
ad slot which can be filled with either a single image ad or text ads. We
design an core-competitive randomized auction and an
competitive deterministic auction for the Text-and-Image
setting. We also show that both factors are tight
Optimal Competitive Auctions
We study the design of truthful auctions for selling identical items in
unlimited supply (e.g., digital goods) to n unit demand buyers. This classic
problem stands out from profit-maximizing auction design literature as it
requires no probabilistic assumptions on buyers' valuations and employs the
framework of competitive analysis. Our objective is to optimize the worst-case
performance of an auction, measured by the ratio between a given benchmark and
revenue generated by the auction.
We establish a sufficient and necessary condition that characterizes
competitive ratios for all monotone benchmarks. The characterization identifies
the worst-case distribution of instances and reveals intrinsic relations
between competitive ratios and benchmarks in the competitive analysis. With the
characterization at hand, we show optimal competitive auctions for two natural
benchmarks.
The most well-studied benchmark measures the
envy-free optimal revenue where at least two buyers win. Goldberg et al. [13]
showed a sequence of lower bounds on the competitive ratio for each number of
buyers n. They conjectured that all these bounds are tight. We show that
optimal competitive auctions match these bounds. Thus, we confirm the
conjecture and settle a central open problem in the design of digital goods
auctions. As one more application we examine another economically meaningful
benchmark, which measures the optimal revenue across all limited-supply Vickrey
auctions. We identify the optimal competitive ratios to be
for each number of buyers n, that is as
approaches infinity