Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userLower Bound for Envy-Free and Truthful Makespan Approximation on Related Machines
127
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Zhenghui Wang
Publication date
2011
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We study problems of scheduling jobs on related machines so as to minimize the makespan in the setting where machines are strategic agents. In this problem, each job $j$ has a length $l_{j}$ and each machine $i$ has a private speed $t_{i}$. The running time of job $j$ on machine $i$ is $t_{i}l_{j}$. We seek a mechanism that obtains speed bids of machines and then assign jobs and payments to machines so that the machines have incentive to report true speeds and the allocation and payments are also envy-free. We show that 1. A deterministic envy-free, truthful, individually rational, and anonymous mechanism cannot approximate the makespan strictly better than $2-1/m$, where $m$ is the number of machines. This result contrasts with prior work giving a deterministic PTAS for envy-free anonymous assignment and a distinct deterministic PTAS for truthful anonymous mechanism. 2. For two machines of different speeds, the unique deterministic scalable allocation of any envy-free, truthful, individually rational, and anonymous mechanism is to allocate all jobs to the quickest machine. This allocation is the same as that of the VCG mechanism, yielding a 2-approximation to the minimum makespan. 3. No payments can make any of the prior published monotone and locally efficient allocations that yield better than an $m$-approximation for $qcmax$ cite{aas, at,ck10, dddr, kovacs} a truthful, envy-free, individually rational, and anonymous mechanism.
rate research
Read More
The problem of scheduling unrelated machines by a truthful mechanism to minimize the makespan was introduced in the seminal Algorithmic Mechanism Design paper by Nisan and Ronen. Nisan and Ronen showed that there is a truthful mechanism that provides an approximation ratio of $min(m,n)$, where $n$ is the number of machines and $m$ is the number of jobs. They also proved that no truthful mechanism can provide an approximation ratio better than $2$. Since then, the lower bound was improved to $1 +sqrt 2 approx 2.41$ by Christodoulou, Kotsoupias, and Vidali, and then to $1+phiapprox 2.618$ by Kotsoupias and Vidali. Very recently, the lower bound was improved to $2.755$ by Giannakopoulos, Hammerl, and Pocas. In this paper we further improve the bound to $3-delta$, for every constant $delta>0$. Note that a gap between the upper bound and the lower bounds exists even when the number of machines and jobs is very small. In particular, the known $1+sqrt{2}$ lower bound requires at least $3$ machines and $5$ jobs. In contrast, we show a lower bound of $2.2055$ that uses only $3$ machines and $3$ jobs and a lower bound of $1+sqrt 2$ that uses only $3$ machines and $4$ jobs. For the case of two machines and two jobs we show a lower bound of $2$. Similar bounds for two machines and two jobs were known before but only via complex proofs that characterized all truthful mechanisms that provide a finite approximation ratio in this setting, whereas our new proof uses a simple and direct approach.
We study the envy-free cake-cutting problem for $d+1$ players with $d$ cuts, for both the oracle function model and the polynomial time function model. For the former, we derive a $theta(({1overepsilon})^{d-1})$ time matching bound for the query complexity of $d+1$ player cake cutting with Lipschitz utilities for any $d> 1$. When the utility functions are given by a polynomial time algorithm, we prove the problem to be PPAD-complete. For measurable utility functions, we find a fully polynomial-time algorithm for finding an approximate envy-free allocation of a cake among three people using two cuts.
Approximating the optimal social welfare while preserving truthfulness is a well studied problem in algorithmic mechanism design. Assuming that the social welfare of a given mechanism design problem can be optimized by an integer program whose integrality gap is at most $alpha$, Lavi and Swamy~cite{Lavi11} propose a general approach to designing a randomized $alpha$-approximation mechanism which is truthful in expectation. Their method is based on decomposing an optimal solution for the relaxed linear program into a convex combination of integer solutions. Unfortunately, Lavi and Swamys decomposition technique relies heavily on the ellipsoid method, which is notorious for its poor practical performance. To overcome this problem, we present an alternative decomposition technique which yields an $alpha(1 + epsilon)$ approximation and only requires a quadratic number of calls to an integrality gap verifier.
In the budget-feasible allocation problem, a set of items with varied sizes and values are to be allocated to a group of agents. Each agent has a budget constraint on the total size of items she can receive. The goal is to compute a feasible allocation that is envy-free (EF), in which the agents do not envy each other for the items they receive, nor do they envy a charity, who is endowed with all the unallocated items. Since EF allocations barely exist even without budget constraints, we are interested in the relaxed notion of envy-freeness up to one item (EF1). The computation of both exact and approximate EF1 allocations remains largely open, despite a recent effort by Wu et al. (IJCAI 2021) in showing that any budget-feasible allocation that maximizes the Nash Social Welfare (NSW) is 1/4-approximate EF1. In this paper, we move one step forward by showing that for agents with identical additive valuations, a 1/2-approximate EF1 allocation can be computed in polynomial time. For the uniform-budget and two-agent cases, we propose efficient algorithms for computing an exact EF1 allocation. We also consider the large budget setting, i.e., when the item sizes are infinitesimal compared with the agents budgets, and show that both the NSW maximizing allocation and the allocation our polynomial-time algorithm computes have an approximation close to 1 regarding EF1.
We study the problem of fairly dividing a heterogeneous resource, commonly known as cake cutting and chore division, in the presence of strategic agents. While a number of results in this setting have been established in previous works, they rely crucially on the free disposal assumption, meaning that the mechanism is allowed to throw away part of the resource at no cost. In the present work, we remove this assumption and focus on mechanisms that always allocate the entire resource. We exhibit a truthful and envy-free mechanism for cake cutting and chore division for two agents with piecewise uniform valuations, and we complement our result by showing that such a mechanism does not exist when certain additional constraints are imposed on the mechanisms. Moreover, we provide bounds on the efficiency of mechanisms satisfying various properties, and give truthful mechanisms for multiple agents with restricted classes of valuations.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
