10 research outputs found

    Simplicity-Expressiveness Tradeoffs in Mechanism Design

    Get PDF
    A fundamental result in mechanism design theory, the so-called revelation principle, asserts that for many questions concerning the existence of mechanisms with a given outcome one can restrict attention to truthful direct revelation-mechanisms. In practice, however, many mechanism use a restricted message space. This motivates the study of the tradeoffs involved in choosing simplified mechanisms, which can sometimes bring benefits in precluding bad or promoting good equilibria, and other times impose costs on welfare and revenue. We study the simplicity-expressiveness tradeoff in two representative settings, sponsored search auctions and combinatorial auctions, each being a canonical example for complete information and incomplete information analysis, respectively. We observe that the amount of information available to the agents plays an important role for the tradeoff between simplicity and expressiveness

    Auctions with Severely Bounded Communication

    Full text link
    We study auctions with severe bounds on the communication allowed: each bidder may only transmit t bits of information to the auctioneer. We consider both welfare- and profit-maximizing auctions under this communication restriction. For both measures, we determine the optimal auction and show that the loss incurred relative to unconstrained auctions is mild. We prove non-surprising properties of these kinds of auctions, e.g., that in optimal mechanisms bidders simply report the interval in which their valuation lies in, as well as some surprising properties, e.g., that asymmetric auctions are better than symmetric ones and that multi-round auctions reduce the communication complexity only by a linear factor

    Communication, Distortion, and Randomness in Metric Voting

    Full text link
    In distortion-based analysis of social choice rules over metric spaces, one assumes that all voters and candidates are jointly embedded in a common metric space. Voters rank candidates by non-decreasing distance. The mechanism, receiving only this ordinal (comparison) information, should select a candidate approximately minimizing the sum of distances from all voters. It is known that while the Copeland rule and related rules guarantee distortion at most 5, many other standard voting rules, such as Plurality, Veto, or kk-approval, have distortion growing unboundedly in the number nn of candidates. Plurality, Veto, or kk-approval with small kk require less communication from the voters than all deterministic social choice rules known to achieve constant distortion. This motivates our study of the tradeoff between the distortion and the amount of communication in deterministic social choice rules. We show that any one-round deterministic voting mechanism in which each voter communicates only the candidates she ranks in a given set of kk positions must have distortion at least 2n−kk\frac{2n-k}{k}; we give a mechanism achieving an upper bound of O(n/k)O(n/k), which matches the lower bound up to a constant. For more general communication-bounded voting mechanisms, in which each voter communicates bb bits of information about her ranking, we show a slightly weaker lower bound of Ω(n/b)\Omega(n/b) on the distortion. For randomized mechanisms, it is known that Random Dictatorship achieves expected distortion strictly smaller than 3, almost matching a lower bound of 3−2n3-\frac{2}{n} for any randomized mechanism that only receives each voter's top choice. We close this gap, by giving a simple randomized social choice rule which only uses each voter's first choice, and achieves expected distortion 3−2n3-\frac{2}{n}.Comment: An abbreviated version appear in Proceedings of AAAI 202

    Implementation with a bounded action space

    No full text
    While traditional mechanism design typically assumes isomorphism between the agents’ type- and action spaces, in many situations the agents face strict restrictions on their action space due to, e.g., technical, behavioral or regulatory reasons. We devise a general framework for the study of mechanism design in single-parameter environments with restricted action spaces. Our contribution is threefold. First, we characterize sufficient conditions under which the information-theoretically optimal social-choice rule can be implemented in dominant strategies, and prove that any multilinear social-choice rule is dominant-strategy implementable with no additional cost. Second, we identify necessary conditions for the optimality of actionbounded mechanisms, and fully characterize the optimal mechanisms and strategies in games with two players and two alternatives. Finally, we prove that for any multilinear social-choice rule, the optimal mechanism with k actions incurs an expected loss of O ( 1 k2) compared to the optimal mechanisms with unrestricted action spaces. Our results apply to various economic and computational settings, and we demonstrate their applicability to signaling games, public-good models and routing in networks.

    Implementation with a Bounded Action Space

    No full text
    While traditional mechanism design typically assumes isomorphism between the agents' type- and action spaces, in many situations the agents face strict restrictions on their action space due to, e.g., technical, behavioral or regulatory reasons. We devise a general framework for the study of mechanism design in single-parameter environments with restricted action spaces. Our contribution is threefold. First, we characterize sufficient conditions under which the information-theoretically optimal social-choice rule can be implemented in dominant strategies, and prove that any multilinear social-choice rule is dominant-strategy implementable with no additional cost. Second, we identify necessary conditions for the optimality of action-bounded mechanisms, and fully characterize the optimal mechanisms and strategies in games with two players and two alternatives. Finally, we prove that for any multilinear social-choice rule, the optimal mechanism with k actions incurs an expected loss of O(1/k^2) compared to the optimal mechanisms with unrestricted action spaces. Our results apply to various economic and computational settings, and we demonstrate their applicability to signaling games, public-good models and routing in networks.

    Implementation with a Bounded Action Space

    No full text
    corecore