We consider the use of cost sharing in the Aspnes model of network inoculation, showing that this can improve the cost of the optimal equilibrium by a factor of $O(sqrt{n})$ in a network of $n$ nodes.
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 p
ossible 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.
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 f
or 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 make three different types of contributions to cost-sharing: First, we identify several new classes of combinatorial cost functions that admit incentive-compatible mechanisms achieving both a constant-factor approximation of budget-balance and a p
olylogarithmic approximation of the social cost formulation of efficiency. Second, we prove a new, optimal lower bound on the approximate efficiency of every budget-balanced Moulin mechanism for Steiner tree or SSRoB cost functions. This lower bound exposes a latent approximation hierarchy among different cost-sharing problems. Third, we show that weakening the definition of incentive-compatibility to strategyproofness can permit exponentially more efficient approximately budget-balanced mechanisms, in particular for set cover cost-sharing problems.
Federated learning is a setting where agents, each with access to their own data source, combine models from local data to create a global model. If agents are drawing their data from different distributions, though, federated learning might produce
a biased global model that is not optimal for each agent. This means that agents face a fundamental question: should they choose the global model or their local model? We show how this situation can be naturally analyzed through the framework of coalitional game theory. We propose the following game: there are heterogeneous players with different model parameters governing their data distribution and different amounts of data they have noisily drawn from their own distribution. Each players goal is to obtain a model with minimal expected mean squared error (MSE) on their own distribution. They have a choice of fitting a model based solely on their own data, or combining their learned parameters with those of some subset of the other players. Combining models reduces the variance component of their error through access to more data, but increases the bias because of the heterogeneity of distributions. Here, we derive exact expected MSE values for problems in linear regression and mean estimation. We then analyze the resulting game in the framework of hedonic game theory; we study how players might divide into coalitions, where each set of players within a coalition jointly construct model(s). We analyze three methods of federation, modeling differing degrees of customization. In uniform federation, the agents collectively produce a single model. In coarse-grained federation, each agent can weight the global model together with their local model. In fine-grained federation, each agent can flexibly combine models from all other agents in the federation. For each method, we analyze the stable partitions of players into coalitions.
The growth of the sharing economy is driven by the emergence of sharing platforms, e.g., Uber and Lyft, that match owners looking to share their resources with customers looking to rent them. The design of such platforms is a complex mixture of econo
mics and engineering, and how to optimally design such platforms is still an open problem. In this paper, we focus on the design of prices and subsidies in sharing platforms. Our results provide insights into the tradeoff between revenue maximizing prices and social welfare maximizing prices. Specifically, we introduce a novel model of sharing platforms and characterize the profit and social welfare maximizing prices in this model. Further, we bound the efficiency loss under profit maximizing prices, showing that there is a strong alignment between profit and efficiency in practical settings. Our results highlight that the revenue of platforms may be limited in practice due to supply shortages; thus platforms have a strong incentive to encourage sharing via subsidies. We provide an analytic characterization of when such subsidies are valuable and show how to optimize the size of the subsidy provided. Finally, we validate the insights from our analysis using data from Didi Chuxing, the largest ridesharing platform in China.