Truthful Interval Covering

We initiate the study of a novel problem in mechanism design without money, which we term Truthful Interval Covering (TIC). An instance of TIC consists of a set of agents each associated with an individual interval on a line, and the objective is to decide where to place a covering interval to minimize the total social cost of the agents, which is determined by the intersection of this interval with their individual ones. This fundamental problem can model situations of provisioning a public good, such as the use of power generators to prevent or mitigate load shedding in developing countries. In the strategic version of the problem, the agents wish to minimize their individual costs, and might misreport the position and/or length of their intervals to achieve that. Our goal is to design truthful mechanisms to prevent such strategic misreports and achieve good approximations to the best possible social cost. We consider the fundamental setting of known intervals with equal lengths and provide tight bounds on the approximation ratios achieved by truthful deterministic mechanisms. We also design a randomized truthful mechanism that outperforms all possible deterministic ones. Finally, we highlight a plethora of natural extensions of our model for future work, as well as some natural limitations of those settings

Approximate mechanism design for distributed facility location

We consider a single-facility location problem, where agents are positioned on the real line and are partitioned into multiple disjoint districts. The goal is to choose a location (where a public facility is to be built) so as to minimize the total distance of the agents from it. This process is distributed: the positions of the agents in each district are first aggregated into a representative location for the district, and then one of the district representatives is chosen as the facility location. This indirect access to the positions of the agents inevitably leads to inefficiency, which is captured by the notion of distortion. We study the discrete version of the problem, where the set of alternative locations is finite, as well as the continuous one, where every point of the line is an alternative, and paint an almost complete picture of the distortion landscape of both general and strategyproof distributed mechanisms

Don’t Roll the Dice, Ask Twice: The Two-Query Distortion of Matching Problems and Beyond

In most social choice settings, the participating agents are typically required to express their preferences over the different alternatives in the form of linear orderings. While this simplifies preference elicitation, it inevitably leads to high distortion when aiming to optimize a cardinal objective such as the social welfare, since the values of the agents remain virtually unknown. A recent array of works put forward the agenda of designing mechanisms that can learn the values of the agents for a small number of alternatives via queries, and use this extra information to make a better-informed decision, thus improving distortion. Following this agenda, in this work we focus on a class of combinatorial problems that includes most well-known matching problems and several of their generalizations, such as One-Sided Matching, Two-Sided Matching, General Graph Matching, and $k$-Constrained Resource Allocation. We design two-query mechanisms that achieve the best-possible worst-case distortion in terms of social welfare, and outperform the best-possible expected distortion that can be achieved by randomized ordinal mechanisms

Truthful ownership transfer with expert advice: Blending mechanism design with and without money

When a company undergoes a merger or transfers its ownership, the existing governing body has an opinion on which buyer should take over as the new owner. Similar situations occur while assigning the host of big sports tournaments, like the World Cup or the Olympics. In all these settings, the values of the external bidders are as important as the opinions of the internal experts. Motivated by such scenarios, we consider a social welfare maximizing approach to design and analyze truthful mechanisms in {\em hybrid social choice} settings, where payments can be imposed to the bidders, but not to the experts. Since this problem is a combination of mechanism design with and without monetary transfers, classical solutions like VCG cannot be applied, making this a novel mechanism design problem. We consider the simple but fundamental scenario with one expert and two bidders, and provide tight approximation guarantees of the optimal social welfare. We distinguish between mechanisms that use ordinal and cardinal information, as well as between mechanisms that base their decisions on one of the two sides (either the bidders or the expert) or both. Our analysis shows that the cardinal setting is quite rich and admits several non-trivial randomized truthful mechanisms, and also allows for closer-to-optimal welfare guarantees

A topological characterization of modulo-p arguments and implications for necklace splitting

The classes PPA-p have attracted attention lately, because they are the main candidates for capturing the complexity of Necklace Splitting with p thieves, for prime p. However, these classes were not known to have complete problems of a topological nature, which impedes any progress towards settling the complexity of the Necklace Splitting problem. On the contrary, topological problems have been pivotal in obtaining completeness results for PPAD and PPA, such as the PPAD-completeness of finding a Nash equilibrium [18, 15] and the PPA-completeness of Necklace Splitting with 2 thieves [24]. In this paper, we provide the first topological characterization of the classes PPA-p. First, we show that the computational problem associated with a simple generalization of Tucker's Lemma, termed p-polygon-Tucker, as well as the associated Borsuk-Ulam-type theorem, p-polygon-Borsuk-Ulam, are PPA-p-complete. Then, we show that the computational version of the well-known BSS Theorem [8], as well as the associated BSS-Tucker problem are PPA-p-complete. Finally, using a different generalization of Tucker's Lemma (termed Zp-star-Tucker), which we prove to be PPA-p-complete, we prove that p-thief Necklace Splitting is in PPA-p. This latter result gives a new combinatorial proof for the Necklace Splitting theorem, the only proof of this nature other than that of Meunier [42]. All of our containment results are obtained through a new combinatorial proof for Zp-versions of Tucker's lemma that is a natural generalization of the standard combinatorial proof of Tucker's lemma by Freund and Todd [27]. We believe that this new proof technique is of independent interest

Maximum Nash Welfare and Other Stories About EFX

We consider the classic problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods among agents with additive valuation functions and explore the connection between two prominent fairness notions: maximum Nash welfare (MNW) and envy-freeness up to any good (EFX). We establish that an MNW allocation is always EFX as long as there are at most two possible values for the goods, whereas this implication is no longer true for three or more distinct values. As a notable consequence, this proves the existence of EFX allocations for these restricted valuation functions. While the efficient computation of an MNW allocation for two possible values remains an open problem, we present a novel algorithm for directly constructing EFX allocations in this setting. Finally, we study the question of whether an MNW allocation implies any EFX guarantee for general additive valuation functions under a natural new interpretation of approximate EFX allocations