Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userSocial Cost Guarantees in Smart Route Guidance
84
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Paolo Serafino
Publication date
2019
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We model and study the problem of assigning traffic in an urban road network infrastructure. In our model, each driver submits their intended destination and is assigned a route to follow that minimizes the social cost (i.e., travel distance of all the drivers). We assume drivers are strategic and try to manipulate the system (i.e., misreport their intended destination and/or deviate from the assigned route) if they can reduce their travel distance by doing so. Such strategic behavior is highly undesirable as it can lead to an overall suboptimal traffic assignment and cause congestion. To alleviate this problem, we develop moneyless mechanisms that are resilient to manipulation by the agents and offer provable approximation guarantees on the social cost obtained by the solution. We then empirically test the mechanisms studied in the paper, showing that they can be effectively used in practice in order to compute manipulation resistant traffic allocations.
rate research
Read More
To alleviate traffic congestion, a variety of route guidance strategies has been proposed for intelligent transportation systems. A number of the strategies are proposed and investigated on a symmetric two-route traffic system over the past decade. To evaluate the strategies in a more general scenario, this paper conducts eight prevalent strategies on a asymmetric two-route traffic network with different slowdown behaviors on alternative routes. The results show that only mean velocity feedback strategy is able to equalize travel time, i.e., approximate user optimality; while the others fail due to incapability of establishing relations between the feedback parameters and travel time. The paper helps better understand these strategies, and suggests mean velocity feedback strategy if the authority intends to achieve user optimality.
Computational and economic results suggest that social welfare maximization and combinatorial auction design are much easier when bidders valuations satisfy the gross substitutes condition. The goal of this paper is to evaluate rigorously the folklore belief that the main take-aways from these results remain valid in settings where the gross substitutes condition holds only approximately. We show that for valuations that pointwise approximate a gross substitutes valuation (in fact even a linear valuation), optimal social welfare cannot be approximated to within a subpolynomial factor and demand oracles cannot be simulated using a subexponential number of value queries. We then provide several positive results by imposing additional structure on the valuations (beyond gross substitutes), using a more stringent notion of approximation, and/or using more powerful oracle access to the valuations. For example, we prove that the performance of the greedy algorithm degrades gracefully for near-linear valuations with approximately decreasing marginal values, that with demand queries, approximate welfare guarantees for XOS valuations degrade gracefully for valuations that are pointwise close to XOS, and that the performance of the Kelso-Crawford auction degrades gracefully for valuations that are close to various subclasses of gross substitutes valuations.
Motivated by the emergence of popular service-based two-sided markets where sellers can serve multiple buyers at the same time, we formulate and study the {em two-sided cost sharing} problem. In two-sided cost sharing, sellers incur different costs for serving different subsets of buyers and buyers have different values for being served by different sellers. Both buyers and sellers are self-interested agents whose values and costs are private information. We study the problem from the perspective of an intermediary platform that matches buyers to sellers and assigns prices and wages in an effort to maximize welfare (i.e., buyer values minus seller costs) subject to budget-balance in an incentive compatible manner. In our markets of interest, agents trade the (often same) services multiple times. Moreover, the value and cost for the same service differs based on the context (e.g., location, urgency, weather conditions, etc). In this framework, we design mechanisms that are efficient, ex-ante budget-balanced, ex-ante individually rational, dominant strategy incentive compatible, and ex-ante in the core (a natural generalization of the core that we define here).
We introduce a combinatorial variant of the cost sharing problem: several services can be provided to each player and each player values every combination of services differently. A publicly known cost function specifies the cost of providing every possible combination of services. A combinatorial cost sharing mechanism is a protocol that decides which services each player gets and at what price. We look for dominant strategy mechanisms that are (economically) efficient and cover the cost, ideally without overcharging (i.e., budget balanced). Note that unlike the standard cost sharing setting, combinatorial cost sharing is a multi-parameter domain. This makes designing dominant strategy mechanisms with good guarantees a challenging task. We present the Potential Mechanism -- a combination of the VCG mechanism and a well-known tool from the theory of cooperative games: Hart and Mas-Colells potential function. The potential mechanism is a dominant strategy mechanism that always covers the incurred cost. When the cost function is subadditive the same mechanism is also approximately efficient. Our main technical contribution shows that when the cost function is submodular the potential mechanism is approximately budget balanced in three settings: supermodular valuations, symmetric cost function and general symmetric valuations, and two players with general valuations.
We provide a characterization of revenue-optimal dynamic mechanisms in settings where a monopolist sells k items over k periods to a buyer who realizes his value for item i in the beginning of period i. We require that the mechanism satisfies a strong individual rationality constraint, requiring that the stage utility of each agent be positive during each period. We show that the optimum mechanism can be computed by solving a nested sequence of static (single-period) mechanisms that optimize a tradeoff between the surplus of the allocation and the buyers utility. We also provide a simple dynamic mechanism that obtains at least half of the optimal revenue. The mechanism either ignores history and posts the optimal monopoly price in each period, or allocates with a probability that is independent of the current report of the agent and is based only on previous reports. Our characterization extends to multi-agent auctions. We also formulate a discounted infinite horizon version of the problem, where we study the performance of Markov mechanisms.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
