On the Inefficiency of the Uniform Price Auction

We present our results on Uniform Price Auctions, one of the standard sealed-bid multi-unit auction formats, for selling multiple identical units of a single good to multi-demand bidders. Contrary to the truthful and economically efficient multi-unit Vickrey auction, the Uniform Price Auction encourages strategic bidding and is socially inefficient in general. The uniform pricing rule is, however, widely popular by its appeal to the natural anticipation, that identical items should be identically priced. In this work we study equilibria of the Uniform Price Auction for bidders with (symmetric) submodular valuation functions, over the number of units that they win. We investigate pure Nash equilibria of the auction in undominated strategies; we produce a characterization of these equilibria that allows us to prove that a fraction 1-1/e of the optimum social welfare is always recovered in undominated pure Nash equilibrium -- and this bound is essentially tight. Subsequently, we study the auction under the incomplete information setting and prove a bound of 4-2/k on the economic inefficiency of (mixed) Bayes Nash equilibria that are supported by undominated strategies.Comment: Additions and Improvements upon SAGT 2012 results (and minor corrections on the previous version

Tight Bounds for the Price of Anarchy of Simultaneous First Price Auctions

We study the Price of Anarchy of simultaneous first-price auctions for buyers with submodular and subadditive valuations. The current best upper bounds for the Bayesian Price of Anarchy of these auctions are e/(e-1) [Syrgkanis and Tardos 2013] and 2 [Feldman et al. 2013], respectively. We provide matching lower bounds for both cases even for the case of full information and for mixed Nash equilibria via an explicit construction. We present an alternative proof of the upper bound of e/(e-1) for first-price auctions with fractionally subadditive valuations which reveals the worst-case price distribution, that is used as a building block for the matching lower bound construction. We generalize our results to a general class of item bidding auctions that we call bid-dependent auctions (including first-price auctions and all-pay auctions) where the winner is always the highest bidder and each bidder's payment depends only on his own bid. Finally, we apply our techniques to discriminatory price multi-unit auctions. We complement the results of [de Keijzer et al. 2013] for the case of subadditive valuations, by providing a matching lower bound of 2. For the case of submodular valuations, we provide a lower bound of 1.109. For the same class of valuations, we were able to reproduce the upper bound of e/(e-1) using our non-smooth approach.Comment: 37 pages, 5 figures, ACM Transactions on Economics and Computatio

Complexity Theory, Game Theory, and Economics: The Barbados Lectures

This document collects the lecture notes from my mini-course "Complexity Theory, Game Theory, and Economics," taught at the Bellairs Research Institute of McGill University, Holetown, Barbados, February 19--23, 2017, as the 29th McGill Invitational Workshop on Computational Complexity. The goal of this mini-course is twofold: (i) to explain how complexity theory has helped illuminate several barriers in economics and game theory; and (ii) to illustrate how game-theoretic questions have led to new and interesting complexity theory, including recent several breakthroughs. It consists of two five-lecture sequences: the Solar Lectures, focusing on the communication and computational complexity of computing equilibria; and the Lunar Lectures, focusing on applications of complexity theory in game theory and economics. No background in game theory is assumed.Comment: Revised v2 from December 2019 corrects some errors in and adds some recent citations to v1 Revised v3 corrects a few typos in v

On the Efficiency of the Walrasian Mechanism

Central results in economics guarantee the existence of efficient equilibria for various classes of markets. An underlying assumption in early work is that agents are price-takers, i.e., agents honestly report their true demand in response to prices. A line of research in economics, initiated by Hurwicz (1972), is devoted to understanding how such markets perform when agents are strategic about their demands. This is captured by the \emph{Walrasian Mechanism} that proceeds by collecting reported demands, finding clearing prices in the \emph{reported} market via an ascending price t\^{a}tonnement procedure, and returns the resulting allocation. Similar mechanisms are used, for example, in the daily opening of the New York Stock Exchange and the call market for copper and gold in London. In practice, it is commonly observed that agents in such markets reduce their demand leading to behaviors resembling bargaining and to inefficient outcomes. We ask how inefficient the equilibria can be. Our main result is that the welfare of every pure Nash equilibrium of the Walrasian mechanism is at least one quarter of the optimal welfare, when players have gross substitute valuations and do not overbid. Previous analysis of the Walrasian mechanism have resorted to large market assumptions to show convergence to efficiency in the limit. Our result shows that approximate efficiency is guaranteed regardless of the size of the market

Generalized Second Price Auction with Probabilistic Broad Match

Generalized Second Price (GSP) auctions are widely used by search engines today to sell their ad slots. Most search engines have supported broad match between queries and bid keywords when executing GSP auctions, however, it has been revealed that GSP auction with the standard broad-match mechanism they are currently using (denoted as SBM-GSP) has several theoretical drawbacks (e.g., its theoretical properties are known only for the single-slot case and full-information setting, and even in this simple setting, the corresponding worst-case social welfare can be rather bad). To address this issue, we propose a novel broad-match mechanism, which we call the Probabilistic Broad-Match (PBM) mechanism. Different from SBM that puts together the ads bidding on all the keywords matched to a given query for the GSP auction, the GSP with PBM (denoted as PBM-GSP) randomly samples a keyword according to a predefined probability distribution and only runs the GSP auction for the ads bidding on this sampled keyword. We perform a comprehensive study on the theoretical properties of the PBM-GSP. Specifically, we study its social welfare in the worst equilibrium, in both full-information and Bayesian settings. The results show that PBM-GSP can generate larger welfare than SBM-GSP under mild conditions. Furthermore, we also study the revenue guarantee for PBM-GSP in Bayesian setting. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work on broad-match mechanisms for GSP that goes beyond the single-slot case and the full-information setting

Nash Social Welfare Approximation for Strategic Agents

The fair division of resources is an important age-old problem that has led to a rich body of literature. At the center of this literature lies the question of whether there exist fair mechanisms despite strategic behavior of the agents. A fundamental objective function used for measuring fair outcomes is the Nash social welfare, defined as the geometric mean of the agent utilities. This objective function is maximized by widely known solution concepts such as Nash bargaining and the competitive equilibrium with equal incomes. In this work we focus on the question of (approximately) implementing the Nash social welfare. The starting point of our analysis is the Fisher market, a fundamental model of an economy, whose benchmark is precisely the (weighted) Nash social welfare. We begin by studying two extreme classes of valuations functions, namely perfect substitutes and perfect complements, and find that for perfect substitutes, the Fisher market mechanism has a constant approximation: at most 2 and at least e1e. However, for perfect complements, the Fisher market does not work well, its bound degrading linearly with the number of players. Strikingly, the Trading Post mechanism---an indirect market mechanism also known as the Shapley-Shubik game---has significantly better performance than the Fisher market on its own benchmark. Not only does Trading Post achieve an approximation of 2 for perfect substitutes, but this bound holds for all concave utilities and becomes arbitrarily close to optimal for Leontief utilities (perfect complements), where it reaches $(1+\epsilon)$ for every $\epsilon > 0$. Moreover, all the Nash equilibria of the Trading Post mechanism are pure for all concave utilities and satisfy an important notion of fairness known as proportionality

Simplicity-Expressiveness Tradeoffs in Mechanism Design

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