Prior-Independent Mechanisms for Scheduling

We study the makespan minimization problem with unrelated selfish machines under the assumption that job sizes are stochastic. We design simple truthful mechanisms that under various distributional assumptions provide constant and sublogarithmic approximations to expected makespan. Our mechanisms are prior-independent in that they do not rely on knowledge of the job size distributions. Prior-independent approximation mechanisms have been previously studied for the objective of revenue maximization [Dhangwatnotai, Roughgarden and Yan'10, Devanur, Hartline, Karlin and Nguyen'11, Roughgarden, Talgam-Cohen and Yan'12]. In contrast to our results, in prior-free settings no truthful anonymous deterministic mechanism for the makespan objective can provide a sublinear approximation [Ashlagi, Dobzinski and Lavi'09].Comment: This paper will appear in Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing 2013 (STOC'13

07261 Abstracts Collection -- Fair Division

From 24.06. to 29.06.2007, the Dagstuhl Seminar 07261 % generate automatically ``Fair Division\u27\u27 % generate automatically was held in the International Conference and Research Center (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl. During the seminar, several participants presented their current research, and ongoing work and open problems were discussed. Abstracts of the presentations given during the seminar as well as abstracts of seminar results and ideas are put together in this paper. The first section describes the seminar topics and goals in general. Links to extended abstracts or full papers are provided, if available

10211 Abstracts Collection -- Flexible Network Design

From Monday 24.05.2010---Friday 28.05.2010, the Dagstuhl Seminar 10211 ``Flexible Network Design \u27\u27 was held in Schloss Dagstuhl~--~Leibniz Center for Informatics. During the seminar, several participants presented their current research, and ongoing work and open problems were discussed. Abstracts of the presentations given during the seminar as well as abstracts of seminar results and ideas are put together in this paper. The first section describes the seminar topics and goals in general. Links to extended abstracts or full papers are provided, if available

Mechanisms that play a game, not toss a coin

Randomized mechanisms can have good normative properties compared to their deterministic counterparts. However, randomized mechanisms are problematic in several ways such as in their verifiability. We propose here to derandomize such mechanisms by having agents play a game instead of tossing a coin. The game is designed so an agent's best action is to play randomly, and this play then injects ``randomness'' into the mechanism. This derandomization retains many of the good normative properties of the original randomized mechanism but gives a mechanism that is deterministic and easy, for instance, to audit. We consider three related methods to derandomize randomized mechanism in six different domains: voting, facility location, task allocation, school choice, peer selection, and resource allocation. We propose a number of novel derandomized mechanisms for these six domains with good normative properties. Each mechanism has a mixed Nash equilibrium in which agents play a modular arithmetic game with an uniform mixed strategy. In all but one mixed Nash equilibrium, agents report their preferences over the original problem sincerely. The derandomized methods are thus ``quasi-strategy proof''. In one domain, we additionally show that a new and desirable normative property emerges as a result of derandomization

Lottery pricing equilibria

We extend the notion of Combinatorial Walrasian Equilibrium, as defined by Feldman et al. [2013], to settings with budgets. When agents have budgets, the maximum social welfare as traditionally defined is not a suitable benchmark since it is overly optimistic. This motivated the liquid welfare of [Dobzinski and Paes Leme 2014] as an alternative. Observing that no combinatorial Walrasian equilibrium guarantees a non-zero fraction of the maximum liquid welfare in the absence of randomization, we instead work with randomized allocations and extend the notions of liquid welfare and Combinatorial Walrasian Equilibrium accordingly. Our generalization of the Combinatorial Walrasian Equilibrium prices lotteries over bundles of items rather than bundles, and we term it a lottery pricing equilibrium. Our results are two-fold. First, we exhibit an efficient algorithm which turns a randomized allocation with liquid expected welfare W into a lottery pricing equilibrium with liquid expected welfare 3-√5/2 W (≈ 0.3819-W). Next, given access to a demand oracle and an α-approximate oblivious rounding algorithm for the configuration linear program for the welfare maximization problem, we show how to efficiently compute a randomized allocation which is (a) supported on polynomially-many deterministic allocations and (b) obtains [nearly] an α fraction of the optimal liquid expected welfare. In the case of subadditive valuations, combining both results yields an efficient algorithm which computes a lottery pricing equilibrium obtaining a constant fraction of the optimal liquid expected welfare. © Copyright 2016 ACM

Packing, Scheduling and Covering Problems in a Game-Theoretic Perspective

Many packing, scheduling and covering problems that were previously considered by computer science literature in the context of various transportation and production problems, appear also suitable for describing and modeling various fundamental aspects in networks optimization such as routing, resource allocation, congestion control, etc. Various combinatorial problems were already studied from the game theoretic standpoint, and we attempt to complement to this body of research. Specifically, we consider the bin packing problem both in the classic and parametric versions, the job scheduling problem and the machine covering problem in various machine models. We suggest new interpretations of such problems in the context of modern networks and study these problems from a game theoretic perspective by modeling them as games, and then concerning various game theoretic concepts in these games by combining tools from game theory and the traditional combinatorial optimization. In the framework of this research we introduce and study models that were not considered before, and also improve upon previously known results.Comment: PhD thesi