Showing 1–29 of 29 results for author: Gkatzelis, V

Clock Auctions Augmented with Unreliable Advice

Authors: Vasilis Gkatzelis, Daniel Schoepflin, Xizhi Tan

Abstract: We provide the first analysis of clock auctions through the learning-augmented framework. Deferred-acceptance clock auctions are a compelling class of mechanisms satisfying a unique list of highly practical properties, including obvious strategy-proofness, transparency, and unconditional winner privacy, making them particularly well-suited for real-world applications. However, early work that eval… ▽ More We provide the first analysis of clock auctions through the learning-augmented framework. Deferred-acceptance clock auctions are a compelling class of mechanisms satisfying a unique list of highly practical properties, including obvious strategy-proofness, transparency, and unconditional winner privacy, making them particularly well-suited for real-world applications. However, early work that evaluated their performance from a worst-case analysis standpoint concluded that no deterministic clock auction can achieve much better than an $O(\log n)$ approximation of the optimal social welfare (where $n$ is the number of bidders participating in the auction), even in seemingly very simple settings. To overcome this overly pessimistic impossibility result, which heavily depends on the assumption that the designer has no information regarding the preferences of the participating bidders, we leverage the learning-augmented framework. This framework assumes that the designer is provided with some advice regarding what the optimal solution may be. This advice may be the product of machine-learning algorithms applied to historical data, so it can provide very useful guidance, but it can also be highly unreliable. Our main results are learning-augmented clock auctions that use this advice to achieve much stronger performance guarantees whenever the advice is accurate (known as consistency), while simultaneously maintaining worst-case guarantees even if this advice is arbitrarily inaccurate (known as robustness). Specifically, for the standard notion of consistency, we provide a clock auction that achieves the best of both worlds: $(1+ε)$-consistency for any constant $ε> 0$ and $O(\log n)$ robustness. We then also consider a much stronger notion of consistency and provide an auction that achieves the optimal trade-off between this notion of consistency and robustness. △ Less

Submitted 12 August, 2024; originally announced August 2024.

Online Mechanism Design with Predictions

Authors: Eric Balkanski, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Xizhi Tan, Cherlin Zhu

Abstract: Aiming to overcome some of the limitations of worst-case analysis, the recently proposed framework of "algorithms with predictions" allows algorithms to be augmented with a (possibly erroneous) machine-learned prediction that they can use as a guide. In this framework, the goal is to obtain improved guarantees when the prediction is correct, which is called \emph{consistency}, while simultaneously… ▽ More Aiming to overcome some of the limitations of worst-case analysis, the recently proposed framework of "algorithms with predictions" allows algorithms to be augmented with a (possibly erroneous) machine-learned prediction that they can use as a guide. In this framework, the goal is to obtain improved guarantees when the prediction is correct, which is called \emph{consistency}, while simultaneously guaranteeing some worst-case bounds even when the prediction is arbitrarily wrong, which is called \emph{robustness}. The vast majority of the work on this framework has focused on a refined analysis of online algorithms augmented with predictions regarding the future input. A subsequent line of work has also successfully adapted this framework to mechanism design, where the prediction is regarding the private information of strategic agents. In this paper, we initiate the study of online mechanism design with predictions, which combines the challenges of online algorithms with predictions and mechanism design with predictions. We consider the well-studied problem of designing a revenue-maximizing auction to sell a single item to strategic bidders who arrive and depart over time, each with an unknown, private, value for the item. We study the learning-augmented version of this problem where the auction designer is given a prediction regarding the maximum value over all agents. Our main result is a strategyproof mechanism whose revenue guarantees are $α$-consistent with respect to the highest value and $(1-α^2)/4$-robust with respect to the second-highest value, for $α\in [0,1]$. We show that this tradeoff is optimal within a broad and natural family of auctions, meaning that any $α$-consistent mechanism in that family has robustness at most $(1-α^2)/4$. Finally, we extend our mechanism to also achieve expected revenues proportional to the prediction quality. △ Less

Submitted 26 March, 2024; v1 submitted 4 October, 2023; originally announced October 2023.

Comments: 25 pages, 1 figure

Learning-Augmented Metric Distortion via $(p,q)$-Veto Core

Authors: Ben Berger, Michal Feldman, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Xizhi Tan

Abstract: In the metric distortion problem there is a set of candidates $C$ and voters $V$ in the same metric space. The goal is to select a candidate minimizing the social cost: the sum of distances of the selected candidate from all the voters, and the challenge arises from the algorithm receiving only ordinaL input: each voter's ranking of candidate, while the objective function is cardinal, determined b… ▽ More In the metric distortion problem there is a set of candidates $C$ and voters $V$ in the same metric space. The goal is to select a candidate minimizing the social cost: the sum of distances of the selected candidate from all the voters, and the challenge arises from the algorithm receiving only ordinaL input: each voter's ranking of candidate, while the objective function is cardinal, determined by the underlying metric. The distortion of an algorithm is its worst-case approximation factor of the optimal social cost. A key concept here is the (p,q)-veto core, with $p\in Δ(V)$ and $q\in Δ(C)$ being normalized weight vectors representing voters' veto power and candidates' support, respectively. The (p,q)-veto core corresponds to a set of winners from a specific class of deterministic algorithms. Notably, the optimal distortion of $3$ is obtained from this class, by selecting veto core candidates using uniform $p$ and $q$ proportional to candidates' plurality scores. Bounding the distortion of other algorithms from this class is an open problem. Our contribution is twofold. First, we establish upper bounds on the distortion of candidates from the (p,q)-veto core for arbitrary weight vectors $p$ and $q$. Second, we revisit the metric distortion problem through the \emph{learning-augmented} framework, which equips the algorithm with a (machine-learned) prediction regarding the optimal candidate. The quality of this prediction is unknown, and the goal is to optimize the algorithm's performance under accurate predictions (consistency), while simultaneously providing worst-case guarantees under arbitrarily inaccurate predictions (robustness). We propose an algorithm that chooses candidates from the (p,q)-veto core, using a prediction-guided q vector and, leveraging our distortion bounds, we prove that this algorithm achieves the optimal robustness-consistency trade-off. △ Less

Submitted 11 July, 2024; v1 submitted 14 July, 2023; originally announced July 2023.

Getting More by Knowing Less: Bayesian Incentive Compatible Mechanisms for Fair Division

Authors: Vasilis Gkatzelis, Alexandros Psomas, Xizhi Tan, Paritosh Verma

Abstract: We study fair resource allocation with strategic agents. It is well-known that, across multiple fundamental problems in this domain, truthfulness and fairness are incompatible. For example, when allocating indivisible goods, no truthful and deterministic mechanism can guarantee envy-freeness up to one item (EF1), even for two agents with additive valuations. Or, in cake-cutting, no truthful and de… ▽ More We study fair resource allocation with strategic agents. It is well-known that, across multiple fundamental problems in this domain, truthfulness and fairness are incompatible. For example, when allocating indivisible goods, no truthful and deterministic mechanism can guarantee envy-freeness up to one item (EF1), even for two agents with additive valuations. Or, in cake-cutting, no truthful and deterministic mechanism always outputs a proportional allocation, even for two agents with piecewise constant valuations. Our work stems from the observation that, in the context of fair division, truthfulness is used as a synonym for Dominant Strategy Incentive Compatibility (DSIC), requiring that an agent prefers reporting the truth, no matter what other agents report. In this paper, we instead focus on Bayesian Incentive Compatible (BIC) mechanisms, requiring that agents are better off reporting the truth in expectation over other agents' reports. We prove that, when agents know a bit less about each other, a lot more is possible: BIC mechanisms can guarantee fairness notions that are unattainable by DSIC mechanisms in both the fundamental problems of allocation of indivisible goods and cake-cutting. We prove that this is the case even for an arbitrary number of agents, as long as the agents' priors about each others' types satisfy a neutrality condition. Notably, for the case of indivisible goods, we significantly strengthen the state-of-the-art negative result for efficient DSIC mechanisms, while also highlighting the limitations of BIC mechanisms, by showing that a very general class of welfare objectives is incompatible with Bayesian Incentive Compatibility. Combined these results give a near-complete picture of the power and limitations of BIC and DSIC mechanisms for the problem of allocating indivisible goods. △ Less

Submitted 16 May, 2024; v1 submitted 3 June, 2023; originally announced June 2023.

Comments: IJCAI 2024, 27 pages

Best of Both Distortion Worlds

Authors: Vasilis Gkatzelis, Mohamad Latifian, Nisarg Shah

Abstract: We study the problem of designing voting rules that take as input the ordinal preferences of $n$ agents over a set of $m$ alternatives and output a single alternative, aiming to optimize the overall happiness of the agents. The input to the voting rule is each agent's ranking of the alternatives from most to least preferred, yet the agents have more refined (cardinal) preferences that capture the… ▽ More We study the problem of designing voting rules that take as input the ordinal preferences of $n$ agents over a set of $m$ alternatives and output a single alternative, aiming to optimize the overall happiness of the agents. The input to the voting rule is each agent's ranking of the alternatives from most to least preferred, yet the agents have more refined (cardinal) preferences that capture the intensity with which they prefer one alternative over another. To quantify the extent to which voting rules can optimize over the cardinal preferences given access only to the ordinal ones, prior work has used the distortion measure, i.e., the worst-case approximation ratio between a voting rule's performance and the best performance achievable given the cardinal preferences. The work on the distortion of voting rules has been largely divided into two worlds: utilitarian distortion and metric distortion. In the former, the cardinal preferences of the agents correspond to general utilities and the goal is to maximize a normalized social welfare. In the latter, the agents' cardinal preferences correspond to costs given by distances in an underlying metric space and the goal is to minimize the (unnormalized) social cost. Several deterministic and randomized voting rules have been proposed and evaluated for each of these worlds separately, gradually improving the achievable distortion bounds, but none of the known voting rules perform well in both worlds simultaneously. In this work, we prove that one can achieve the best of both worlds by designing new voting rules, that simultaneously achieve near-optimal distortion guarantees in both distortion worlds. We also prove that this positive result does not generalize to the case where the voting rule is provided with the rankings of only the top-$t$ alternatives of each agent, for $t<m$. △ Less

Submitted 30 May, 2023; originally announced May 2023.

Comments: EC'23

EFx Budget-Feasible Allocations with High Nash Welfare

Authors: Marius Garbea, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Xizhi Tan

Abstract: We study the problem of allocating indivisible items to budget-constrained agents, aiming to provide fairness and efficiency guarantees. Specifically, our goal is to ensure that the resulting allocation is envy-free up to any item (EFx) while minimizing the amount of inefficiency that this needs to introduce. We first show that there exist two-agent problem instances for which no EFx allocation is… ▽ More We study the problem of allocating indivisible items to budget-constrained agents, aiming to provide fairness and efficiency guarantees. Specifically, our goal is to ensure that the resulting allocation is envy-free up to any item (EFx) while minimizing the amount of inefficiency that this needs to introduce. We first show that there exist two-agent problem instances for which no EFx allocation is Pareto efficient. We, therefore, turn to approximation and use the Nash social welfare maximizing allocation as a benchmark. For two-agent instances, we provide a procedure that always returns an EFx allocation while achieving the best possible approximation of the optimal Nash social welfare that EFx allocations can achieve. For the more complicated case of three-agent instances, we provide a procedure that guarantees EFx, while achieving a constant approximation of the optimal Nash social welfare for any number of items. △ Less

Submitted 2 August, 2023; v1 submitted 3 May, 2023; originally announced May 2023.

Comments: Appears in the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI) 2023

Proportionally Fair Online Allocation of Public Goods with Predictions

Authors: Siddhartha Banerjee, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Safwan Hossain, Billy Jin, Evi Micha, Nisarg Shah

Abstract: We design online algorithms for the fair allocation of public goods to a set of $N$ agents over a sequence of $T$ rounds and focus on improving their performance using predictions. In the basic model, a public good arrives in each round, the algorithm learns every agent's value for the good, and must irrevocably decide the amount of investment in the good without exceeding a total budget of $B$ ac… ▽ More We design online algorithms for the fair allocation of public goods to a set of $N$ agents over a sequence of $T$ rounds and focus on improving their performance using predictions. In the basic model, a public good arrives in each round, the algorithm learns every agent's value for the good, and must irrevocably decide the amount of investment in the good without exceeding a total budget of $B$ across all rounds. The algorithm can utilize (potentially inaccurate) predictions of each agent's total value for all the goods to arrive. We measure the performance of the algorithm using a proportional fairness objective, which informally demands that every group of agents be rewarded in proportion to its size and the cohesiveness of its preferences. In the special case of binary agent preferences and a unit budget, we show that $O(\log N)$ proportional fairness can be achieved without using any predictions, and that this is optimal even if perfectly accurate predictions were available. However, for general preferences and budget no algorithm can achieve better than $Θ(T/B)$ proportional fairness without predictions. We show that algorithms with (reasonably accurate) predictions can do much better, achieving $Θ(\log (T/B))$ proportional fairness. We also extend this result to a general model in which a batch of $L$ public goods arrive in each round and achieve $O(\log (\min(N,L) \cdot T/B))$ proportional fairness. Our exact bounds are parametrized as a function of the error in the predictions and the performance degrades gracefully with increasing errors. △ Less

Submitted 30 September, 2022; originally announced September 2022.

Optimal Data Acquisition with Privacy-Aware Agents

Authors: Rachel Cummings, Hadi Elzayn, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Emmanouil Pountourakis, Juba Ziani

Abstract: We study the problem faced by a data analyst or platform that wishes to collect private data from privacy-aware agents. To incentivize participation, in exchange for this data, the platform provides a service to the agents in the form of a statistic computed using all agents' submitted data. The agents decide whether to join the platform (and truthfully reveal their data) or not participate by con… ▽ More We study the problem faced by a data analyst or platform that wishes to collect private data from privacy-aware agents. To incentivize participation, in exchange for this data, the platform provides a service to the agents in the form of a statistic computed using all agents' submitted data. The agents decide whether to join the platform (and truthfully reveal their data) or not participate by considering both the privacy costs of joining and the benefit they get from obtaining the statistic. The platform must ensure the statistic is computed differentially privately and chooses a central level of noise to add to the computation, but can also induce personalized privacy levels (or costs) by giving different weights to different agents in the computation as a function of their heterogeneous privacy preferences (which are known to the platform). We assume the platform aims to optimize the accuracy of the statistic, and must pick the privacy level of each agent to trade-off between i) incentivizing more participation and ii) adding less noise to the estimate. We provide a semi-closed form characterization of the optimal choice of agent weights for the platform in two variants of our model. In both of these models, we identify a common nontrivial structure in the platform's optimal solution: an instance-specific number of agents with the least stringent privacy requirements are pooled together and given the same weight, while the weights of the remaining agents decrease as a function of the strength of their privacy requirement. We also provide algorithmic results on how to find the optimal value of the noise parameter used by the platform and of the weights given to the agents. △ Less

Submitted 13 September, 2022; originally announced September 2022.

Strategyproof Scheduling with Predictions

Authors: Eric Balkanski, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Xizhi Tan

Abstract: In their seminal paper that initiated the field of algorithmic mechanism design, \citet{NR99} studied the problem of designing strategyproof mechanisms for scheduling jobs on unrelated machines aiming to minimize the makespan. They provided a strategyproof mechanism that achieves an $n$-approximation and they made the bold conjecture that this is the best approximation achievable by any determinis… ▽ More In their seminal paper that initiated the field of algorithmic mechanism design, \citet{NR99} studied the problem of designing strategyproof mechanisms for scheduling jobs on unrelated machines aiming to minimize the makespan. They provided a strategyproof mechanism that achieves an $n$-approximation and they made the bold conjecture that this is the best approximation achievable by any deterministic strategyproof scheduling mechanism. After more than two decades and several efforts, $n$ remains the best known approximation and very recent work by \citet{CKK21} has been able to prove an $Ω(\sqrt{n})$ approximation lower bound for all deterministic strategyproof mechanisms. This strong negative result, however, heavily depends on the fact that the performance of these mechanisms is evaluated using worst-case analysis. To overcome such overly pessimistic, and often uninformative, worst-case bounds, a surge of recent work has focused on the ``learning-augmented framework'', whose goal is to leverage machine-learned predictions to obtain improved approximations when these predictions are accurate (consistency), while also achieving near-optimal worst-case approximations even when the predictions are arbitrarily wrong (robustness). In this work, we study the classic strategic scheduling problem of~\citet{NR99} using the learning-augmented framework and give a deterministic polynomial-time strategyproof mechanism that is $6$-consistent and $2n$-robust. We thus achieve the ``best of both worlds'': an $O(1)$ consistency and an $O(n)$ robustness that asymptotically matches the best-known approximation. We then extend this result to provide more general worst-case approximation guarantees as a function of the prediction error. Finally, we complement our positive results by showing that any $1$-consistent deterministic strategyproof mechanism has unbounded robustness. △ Less

Submitted 8 September, 2022; originally announced September 2022.

Comments: 23 pages, 2 figures

Improved Price of Anarchy via Predictions

Authors: Vasilis Gkatzelis, Kostas Kollias, Alkmini Sgouritsa, Xizhi Tan

Abstract: A central goal in algorithmic game theory is to analyze the performance of decentralized multiagent systems, like communication and information networks. In the absence of a central planner who can enforce how these systems are utilized, the users can strategically interact with the system, aiming to maximize their own utility, possibly leading to very inefficient outcomes, and thus a high price o… ▽ More A central goal in algorithmic game theory is to analyze the performance of decentralized multiagent systems, like communication and information networks. In the absence of a central planner who can enforce how these systems are utilized, the users can strategically interact with the system, aiming to maximize their own utility, possibly leading to very inefficient outcomes, and thus a high price of anarchy. To alleviate this issue, the system designer can use decentralized mechanisms that regulate the use of each resource (e.g., using local queuing protocols or scheduling mechanisms), but with only limited information regarding the state of the system. These information limitations have a severe impact on what such decentralized mechanisms can achieve, so most of the success stories in this literature have had to make restrictive assumptions (e.g., by either restricting the structure of the networks or the types of cost functions). In this paper, we overcome some of the obstacles that the literature has imposed on decentralized mechanisms, by designing mechanisms that are enhanced with predictions regarding the missing information. Specifically, inspired by the big success of the literature on "algorithms with predictions", we design decentralized mechanisms with predictions and evaluate their price of anarchy as a function of the prediction error, focusing on two very well-studied classes of games: scheduling games and multicast network formation games. △ Less

Submitted 9 May, 2022; originally announced May 2022.

Comments: To appear in ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC'22)

Learning-Augmented Mechanism Design: Leveraging Predictions for Facility Location

Authors: Priyank Agrawal, Eric Balkanski, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Tingting Ou, Xizhi Tan

Abstract: In this work we introduce an alternative model for the design and analysis of strategyproof mechanisms that is motivated by the recent surge of work in "learning-augmented algorithms". Aiming to complement the traditional approach in computer science, which analyzes the performance of algorithms based on worst-case instances, this line of work has focused on the design and analysis of algorithms t… ▽ More In this work we introduce an alternative model for the design and analysis of strategyproof mechanisms that is motivated by the recent surge of work in "learning-augmented algorithms". Aiming to complement the traditional approach in computer science, which analyzes the performance of algorithms based on worst-case instances, this line of work has focused on the design and analysis of algorithms that are enhanced with machine-learned predictions regarding the optimal solution. The algorithms can use the predictions as a guide to inform their decisions, and the goal is to achieve much stronger performance guarantees when these predictions are accurate (consistency), while also maintaining near-optimal worst-case guarantees, even if these predictions are very inaccurate (robustness). So far, these results have been limited to algorithms, but in this work we argue that another fertile ground for this framework is in mechanism design. We initiate the design and analysis of strategyproof mechanisms that are augmented with predictions regarding the private information of the participating agents. To exhibit the important benefits of this approach, we revisit the canonical problem of facility location with strategic agents in the two-dimensional Euclidean space. We study both the egalitarian and utilitarian social cost functions, and we propose new strategyproof mechanisms that leverage predictions to guarantee an optimal trade-off between consistency and robustness guarantees. This provides the designer with a menu of mechanism options to choose from, depending on her confidence regarding the prediction accuracy. Furthermore, we also prove parameterized approximation results as a function of the prediction error, showing that our mechanisms perform well even when the predictions are not fully accurate. △ Less

Submitted 3 April, 2022; originally announced April 2022.

Comments: 33 pages, 3 figures

Bayesian and Randomized Clock Auctions

Authors: Michal Feldman, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Nick Gravin, Daniel Schoepflin

Abstract: In a single-parameter mechanism design problem, a provider is looking to sell a service to a group of potential buyers. Each buyer $i$ has a private value $v_i$ for receiving the service and a feasibility constraint restricts which sets of buyers can be served simultaneously. Recent work in economics introduced clock auctions as a superior class of auctions for this problem, due to their transpare… ▽ More In a single-parameter mechanism design problem, a provider is looking to sell a service to a group of potential buyers. Each buyer $i$ has a private value $v_i$ for receiving the service and a feasibility constraint restricts which sets of buyers can be served simultaneously. Recent work in economics introduced clock auctions as a superior class of auctions for this problem, due to their transparency, simplicity, and strong incentive guarantees. Subsequent work focused on evaluating the social welfare approximation guarantees of these auctions, leading to strong impossibility results: in the absence of prior information regarding the buyers' values, no deterministic clock auction can achieve a bounded approximation, even for simple feasibility constraints with only two maximal feasible sets. We show that these negative results can be circumvented by using prior information or by leveraging randomization. We provide clock auctions that give a $O(\log\log k)$ approximation for general downward-closed feasibility constraints with $k$ maximal feasible sets for three different information models, ranging from full access to the value distributions to complete absence of information. The more information the seller has, the simpler these auctions are. Under full access, we use a particularly simple deterministic clock auction, called a single-price clock auction, which is only slightly more complex than posted price mechanisms. In this auction, each buyer is offered a single price and a feasible set is selected among those who accept their offers. In the other extreme, where no prior information is available, this approximation guarantee is obtained using a complex randomized clock auction. In addition to our main results, we propose a parameterization that interpolates between single-price clock auctions and general clock auctions, paving the way for an exciting line of future research. △ Less

Submitted 18 February, 2022; originally announced February 2022.

Beyond Cake Cutting: Allocating Homogeneous Divisible Goods

Authors: Ioannis Caragiannis, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Alexandros Psomas, Daniel Schoepflin

Abstract: The problem of fair division known as "cake cutting" has been the focus of multiple papers spanning several decades. The most prominent problem in this line of work has been to bound the query complexity of computing an envy-free outcome in the Robertson-Webb query model. However, the root of this problem's complexity is somewhat artificial: the agents' values are assumed to be additive across dif… ▽ More The problem of fair division known as "cake cutting" has been the focus of multiple papers spanning several decades. The most prominent problem in this line of work has been to bound the query complexity of computing an envy-free outcome in the Robertson-Webb query model. However, the root of this problem's complexity is somewhat artificial: the agents' values are assumed to be additive across different pieces of the "cake" but infinitely complicated within each piece. This is unrealistic in most of the motivating examples, where the cake represents a finite collection of homogeneous goods. We address this issue by introducing a fair division model that more accurately captures these applications: the value that an agent gains from a given good depends only on the amount of the good they receive, yet it can be an arbitrary function of this amount, allowing the agents to express preferences that go beyond standard cake cutting. In this model, we study the query complexity of computing allocations that are not just envy-free, but also approximately Pareto optimal among all envy-free allocations. Using a novel flow-based approach, we show that we can encode the ex-post feasibility of randomized allocations via a polynomial number of constraints, which reduces our problem to solving a linear program. △ Less

Submitted 12 January, 2022; originally announced January 2022.

Prior-Free Clock Auctions for Bidders with Interdependent Values

Authors: Vasilis Gkatzelis, Rishi Patel, Emmanouil Pountourakis, Daniel Schoepflin

Abstract: We study the problem of selling a good to a group of bidders with interdependent values in a prior-free setting. Each bidder has a signal that can take one of $k$ different values, and her value for the good is a weakly increasing function of all the bidders' signals. The bidders are partitioned into $\ell$ expertise-groups, based on how their signal can impact the values for the good, and we prov… ▽ More We study the problem of selling a good to a group of bidders with interdependent values in a prior-free setting. Each bidder has a signal that can take one of $k$ different values, and her value for the good is a weakly increasing function of all the bidders' signals. The bidders are partitioned into $\ell$ expertise-groups, based on how their signal can impact the values for the good, and we prove upper and lower bounds regarding the approximability of social welfare and revenue for a variety of settings, parameterized by $k$ and $\ell$. Our lower bounds apply to all ex-post incentive compatible mechanisms and our upper bounds are all within a small constant of the lower bounds. Our main results take the appealing form of ascending clock auctions and provide strong incentives by admitting the desired outcomes as obvious ex-post equilibria. △ Less

Submitted 19 July, 2021; originally announced July 2021.

Comments: To appear in the 14th International Symposium on Algorithmic Game Theory (SAGT)

Deterministic Budget-Feasible Clock Auctions

Authors: Eric Balkanski, Pranav Garimidi, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Daniel Schoepflin, Xizhi Tan

Abstract: We revisit the well-studied problem of budget-feasible procurement, where a buyer with a strict budget constraint seeks to acquire services from a group of strategic providers (the sellers). During the last decade, several strategyproof budget-feasible procurement auctions have been proposed, aiming to maximize the value of the buyer, while eliciting each seller's true cost for providing their ser… ▽ More We revisit the well-studied problem of budget-feasible procurement, where a buyer with a strict budget constraint seeks to acquire services from a group of strategic providers (the sellers). During the last decade, several strategyproof budget-feasible procurement auctions have been proposed, aiming to maximize the value of the buyer, while eliciting each seller's true cost for providing their service. These solutions predominantly take the form of randomized sealed-bid auctions: they ask the sellers to report their private costs and then use randomization to determine which subset of services will be procured and how much each of the chosen providers will be paid, ensuring that the total payment does not exceed budget. Our main result in this paper is a novel method for designing budget-feasible auctions, leading to solutions that outperform the previously proposed auctions in multiple ways. First, our solutions take the form of descending clock auctions, and thus satisfy a list of properties, such as obvious strategyproofness, group strategyproofness, transparency, and unconditional winner privacy; this makes these auctions much more likely to be used in practice. Second, in contrast to previous results that heavily depend on randomization, our auctions are deterministic. As a result, we provide an affirmative answer to one of the main open questions in this literature, asking whether a deterministic strategyproof auction can achieve a constant approximation when the buyer's valuation function is submodular over the set of services. In addition, we also provide the first deterministic budget-feasible auction that matches the approximation bound of the best-known randomized auction for the class of subadditive valuations. Finally, using our method, we improve the best-known approximation factor for monotone submodular valuations, which has been the focus of most of the prior work. △ Less

Submitted 21 July, 2021; v1 submitted 19 July, 2021; originally announced July 2021.

Resource-Aware Cost-Sharing Mechanisms with Priors

Authors: Vasilis Gkatzelis, Emmanouil Pountourakis, Alkmini Sgouritsa

Abstract: In a decentralized system with $m$ machines, we study the selfish scheduling problem where each user strategically chooses which machine to use. Each machine incurs a cost, which is a function of the total load assigned to it, and some cost-sharing mechanism distributes this cost among the machine's users. The users choose a machine aiming to minimize their own share of the cost, so the cost-shari… ▽ More In a decentralized system with $m$ machines, we study the selfish scheduling problem where each user strategically chooses which machine to use. Each machine incurs a cost, which is a function of the total load assigned to it, and some cost-sharing mechanism distributes this cost among the machine's users. The users choose a machine aiming to minimize their own share of the cost, so the cost-sharing mechanism induces a game among them. We approach this problem from the perspective of a designer who can select which cost-sharing mechanism to use, aiming to minimize the price of anarchy (PoA) of the induced games. Recent work introduced the class of \emph{resource-aware} cost-sharing mechanisms, whose decisions can depend on the set of machines in the system, but are oblivious to the total number of users. These mechanisms can guarantee low PoA bounds for instances where the cost functions of the machines are all convex or concave, but can suffer from very high PoA for cost functions that deviate from these families. In this paper we show that if we enhance the class of resource-aware mechanisms with some prior information regarding the users, then they can achieve low PoA for a much more general family of cost functions. We first show that, as long as the mechanism knows just two of the participating users, then it can assign special roles to them and ensure a constant PoA. We then extend this idea to settings where the mechanism has access to the probability with which each user is present in the system. For all these instances, we provide a mechanism that achieves an expected PoA that is logarithmic in the expected number of users. △ Less

Submitted 3 June, 2021; originally announced June 2021.

Comments: To appear at ACM EC 2021 conference

PROPm Allocations of Indivisible Goods to Multiple Agents

Authors: Artem Baklanov, Pranav Garimidi, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Daniel Schoepflin

Abstract: We study the classic problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods among a group of agents, and focus on the notion of approximate proportionality known as PROPm. Prior work showed that there exists an allocation that satisfies this notion of fairness for instances involving up to five agents, but fell short of proving that this is true in general. We extend this result to show that a PR… ▽ More We study the classic problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods among a group of agents, and focus on the notion of approximate proportionality known as PROPm. Prior work showed that there exists an allocation that satisfies this notion of fairness for instances involving up to five agents, but fell short of proving that this is true in general. We extend this result to show that a PROPm allocation is guaranteed to exist for all instances, independent of the number of agents or goods. Our proof is constructive, providing an algorithm that computes such an allocation and, unlike prior work, the running time of this algorithm is polynomial in both the number of agents and the number of goods. △ Less

Submitted 24 May, 2021; originally announced May 2021.

Fair and Efficient Online Allocations with Normalized Valuations

Authors: Vasilis Gkatzelis, Alexandros Psomas, Xizhi Tan

Abstract: A set of divisible resources becomes available over a sequence of rounds and needs to be allocated immediately and irrevocably. Our goal is to distribute these resources to maximize fairness and efficiency. Achieving any non-trivial guarantees in an adversarial setting is impossible. However, we show that normalizing the agent values, a very common assumption in fair division, allows us to escape… ▽ More A set of divisible resources becomes available over a sequence of rounds and needs to be allocated immediately and irrevocably. Our goal is to distribute these resources to maximize fairness and efficiency. Achieving any non-trivial guarantees in an adversarial setting is impossible. However, we show that normalizing the agent values, a very common assumption in fair division, allows us to escape this impossibility. Our main result is an online algorithm for the case of two agents that ensures the outcome is envy-free while guaranteeing 91.6% of the optimal social welfare. We also show that this is near-optimal: there is no envy-free algorithm that guarantees more than 93.3% of the optimal social welfare. △ Less

Submitted 25 September, 2020; originally announced September 2020.

Achieving Proportionality up to the Maximin Item with Indivisible Goods

Authors: Artem Baklanov, Pranav Garimidi, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Daniel Schoepflin

Abstract: We study the problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods and focus on the classic fairness notion of proportionality. The indivisibility of the goods is long known to pose highly non-trivial obstacles to achieving fairness, and a very vibrant line of research has aimed to circumvent them using appropriate notions of approximate fairness. Recent work has established that even approximate version… ▽ More We study the problem of fairly allocating indivisible goods and focus on the classic fairness notion of proportionality. The indivisibility of the goods is long known to pose highly non-trivial obstacles to achieving fairness, and a very vibrant line of research has aimed to circumvent them using appropriate notions of approximate fairness. Recent work has established that even approximate versions of proportionality (PROPx) may be impossible to achieve even for small instances, while the best known achievable approximations (PROP1) are much weaker. We introduce the notion of proportionality up to the maximin item (PROPm) and show how to reach an allocation satisfying this notion for any instance involving up to five agents with additive valuations. PROPm provides a well-motivated middle-ground between PROP1 and PROPx, while also capturing some elements of the well-studied maximin share (MMS) benchmark: another relaxation of proportionality that has attracted a lot of attention. △ Less

Submitted 14 January, 2021; v1 submitted 20 September, 2020; originally announced September 2020.

Comments: Changes to wording throughout and changes to framing of section 8

Online Nash Social Welfare Maximization with Predictions

Authors: Siddhartha Banerjee, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Artur Gorokh, Billy Jin

Abstract: We consider the problem of allocating a set of divisible goods to $N$ agents in an online manner, aiming to maximize the Nash social welfare, a widely studied objective which provides a balance between fairness and efficiency. The goods arrive in a sequence of $T$ periods and the value of each agent for a good is adversarially chosen when the good arrives. We first observe that no online algorithm… ▽ More We consider the problem of allocating a set of divisible goods to $N$ agents in an online manner, aiming to maximize the Nash social welfare, a widely studied objective which provides a balance between fairness and efficiency. The goods arrive in a sequence of $T$ periods and the value of each agent for a good is adversarially chosen when the good arrives. We first observe that no online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio better than the trivial $O(N)$, unless it is given additional information about the agents' values. Then, in line with the emerging area of "algorithms with predictions", we consider a setting where for each agent, the online algorithm is only given a prediction of her monopolist utility, i.e., her utility if all goods were given to her alone (corresponding to the sum of her values over the $T$ periods). Our main result is an online algorithm whose competitive ratio is parameterized by the multiplicative errors in these predictions. The algorithm achieves a competitive ratio of $O(\log N)$ and $O(\log T)$ if the predictions are perfectly accurate. Moreover, the competitive ratio degrades smoothly with the errors in the predictions, and is surprisingly robust: the logarithmic competitive ratio holds even if the predictions are very inaccurate. We complement this positive result by showing that our bounds are essentially tight: no online algorithm, even if provided with perfectly accurate predictions, can achieve a competitive ratio of $O(\log^{1-ε} N)$ or $O(\log^{1-ε} T)$ for any constant $ε>0$. △ Less

Submitted 2 August, 2021; v1 submitted 8 August, 2020; originally announced August 2020.

Comments: Corrected a mistake in the proof of Lemma 4

Resource-Aware Protocols for Network Cost-Sharing Games

Authors: George Christodoulou, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Mohamad Latifian, Alkmini Sgouritsa

Abstract: We study the extent to which decentralized cost-sharing protocols can achieve good price of anarchy (PoA) bounds in network cost-sharing games with $n$ agents. We focus on the model of resource-aware protocols, where the designer has prior access to the network structure and can also increase the total cost of an edge(overcharging), and we study classes of games with concave or convex cost functio… ▽ More We study the extent to which decentralized cost-sharing protocols can achieve good price of anarchy (PoA) bounds in network cost-sharing games with $n$ agents. We focus on the model of resource-aware protocols, where the designer has prior access to the network structure and can also increase the total cost of an edge(overcharging), and we study classes of games with concave or convex cost functions. We first consider concave cost functions and our main result is a cost-sharing protocol for symmetric games on directed acyclic graphs that achieves a PoA of $2+\varepsilon$ for some arbitrary small positive $\varepsilon$, which improves to $1+\varepsilon$ for games with at least two players. We also achieve a PoA of 1 for series-parallel graphs and show that no protocol can achieve a PoA better than $Ω(\sqrt{n})$ for multicast games. We then also consider convex cost functions and prove analogous results for series-parallel networks and multicast games, as well as a lower bound of $Ω(n)$ for the PoA on directed acyclic graphs without the use of overcharging. △ Less

Submitted 7 July, 2020; originally announced July 2020.

Comments: Full version of a paper published at Economics and Computation (EC) 2020

MSC Class: 91A43; 91A11

Resolving the Optimal Metric Distortion Conjecture

Authors: Vasilis Gkatzelis, Daniel Halpern, Nisarg Shah

Abstract: We study the following metric distortion problem: there are two finite sets of points, $V$ and $C$, that lie in the same metric space, and our goal is to choose a point in $C$ whose total distance from the points in $V$ is as small as possible. However, rather than having access to the underlying distance metric, we only know, for each point in $V$, a ranking of its distances to the points in $C$.… ▽ More We study the following metric distortion problem: there are two finite sets of points, $V$ and $C$, that lie in the same metric space, and our goal is to choose a point in $C$ whose total distance from the points in $V$ is as small as possible. However, rather than having access to the underlying distance metric, we only know, for each point in $V$, a ranking of its distances to the points in $C$. We propose algorithms that choose a point in $C$ using only these rankings as input and we provide bounds on their \emph{distortion} (worst-case approximation ratio). A prominent motivation for this problem comes from voting theory, where $V$ represents a set of voters, $C$ represents a set of candidates, and the rankings correspond to ordinal preferences of the voters. A major conjecture in this framework is that the optimal deterministic algorithm has distortion $3$. We resolve this conjecture by providing a polynomial-time algorithm that achieves distortion $3$, matching a known lower bound. We do so by proving a novel lemma about matching voters to candidates, which we refer to as the \emph{ranking-matching lemma}. This lemma induces a family of novel algorithms, which may be of independent interest, and we show that a special algorithm in this family achieves distortion $3$. We also provide more refined, parameterized, bounds using the notion of $α$-decisiveness, which quantifies the extent to which a voter may prefer her top choice relative to all others. Finally, we introduce a new randomized algorithm with improved distortion compared to known results, and also provide improved lower bounds on the distortion of all deterministic and randomized algorithms. △ Less

Submitted 7 September, 2020; v1 submitted 16 April, 2020; originally announced April 2020.

Comments: An extended abstract of this paper appears in the Proceedings of FOCS 2020

Balanced Ranking with Diversity Constraints

Authors: Ke Yang, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Julia Stoyanovich

Abstract: Many set selection and ranking algorithms have recently been enhanced with diversity constraints that aim to explicitly increase representation of historically disadvantaged populations, or to improve the overall representativeness of the selected set. An unintended consequence of these constraints, however, is reduced in-group fairness: the selected candidates from a given group may not be the be… ▽ More Many set selection and ranking algorithms have recently been enhanced with diversity constraints that aim to explicitly increase representation of historically disadvantaged populations, or to improve the overall representativeness of the selected set. An unintended consequence of these constraints, however, is reduced in-group fairness: the selected candidates from a given group may not be the best ones, and this unfairness may not be well-balanced across groups. In this paper we study this phenomenon using datasets that comprise multiple sensitive attributes. We then introduce additional constraints, aimed at balancing the \in-group fairness across groups, and formalize the induced optimization problems as integer linear programs. Using these programs, we conduct an experimental evaluation with real datasets, and quantify the feasible trade-offs between balance and overall performance in the presence of diversity constraints. △ Less

Submitted 4 June, 2019; originally announced June 2019.

Comments: to appear in IJCAI 2019

A Truthful Cardinal Mechanism for One-Sided Matching

Authors: Rediet Abebe, Richard Cole, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Jason D. Hartline

Abstract: We revisit the well-studied problem of designing mechanisms for one-sided matching markets, where a set of $n$ agents needs to be matched to a set of $n$ heterogeneous items. Each agent $i$ has a value $v_{i,j}$ for each item $j$, and these values are private information that the agents may misreport if doing so leads to a preferred outcome. Ensuring that the agents have no incentive to misreport… ▽ More We revisit the well-studied problem of designing mechanisms for one-sided matching markets, where a set of $n$ agents needs to be matched to a set of $n$ heterogeneous items. Each agent $i$ has a value $v_{i,j}$ for each item $j$, and these values are private information that the agents may misreport if doing so leads to a preferred outcome. Ensuring that the agents have no incentive to misreport requires a careful design of the matching mechanism, and mechanisms proposed in the literature mitigate this issue by eliciting only the \emph{ordinal} preferences of the agents, i.e., their ranking of the items from most to least preferred. However, the efficiency guarantees of these mechanisms are based only on weak measures that are oblivious to the underlying values. In this paper we achieve stronger performance guarantees by introducing a mechanism that truthfully elicits the full \emph{cardinal} preferences of the agents, i.e., all of the $v_{i,j}$ values. We evaluate the performance of this mechanism using the much more demanding Nash bargaining solution as a benchmark, and we prove that our mechanism significantly outperforms all ordinal mechanisms (even non-truthful ones). To prove our approximation bounds, we also study the population monotonicity of the Nash bargaining solution in the context of matching markets, providing both upper and lower bounds which are of independent interest. △ Less

Submitted 20 January, 2020; v1 submitted 18 March, 2019; originally announced March 2019.

Comments: Appears in SODA 2020

Journal ref: Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (pp. 2096-2113). Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM)

Convex Program Duality, Fisher Markets, and Nash Social Welfare

Authors: Richard Cole, Nikhil R. Devanur, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Kamal Jain, Tung Mai, Vijay V. Vazirani, Sadra Yazdanbod

Abstract: We study Fisher markets and the problem of maximizing the Nash social welfare (NSW), and show several closely related new results. In particular, we obtain: -- A new integer program for the NSW maximization problem whose fractional relaxation has a bounded integrality gap. In contrast, the natural integer program has an unbounded integrality gap. -- An improved, and tight, factor 2 analysis of… ▽ More We study Fisher markets and the problem of maximizing the Nash social welfare (NSW), and show several closely related new results. In particular, we obtain: -- A new integer program for the NSW maximization problem whose fractional relaxation has a bounded integrality gap. In contrast, the natural integer program has an unbounded integrality gap. -- An improved, and tight, factor 2 analysis of the algorithm of [7]; in turn showing that the integrality gap of the above relaxation is at most 2. The approximation factor shown by [7] was $2e^{1/e} \approx 2.89$. -- A lower bound of $e^{1/e}\approx 1.44$ on the integrality gap of this relaxation. -- New convex programs for natural generalizations of linear Fisher markets and proofs that these markets admit rational equilibria. These results were obtained by establishing connections between previously known disparate results, and they help uncover their mathematical underpinnings. We show a formal connection between the convex programs of Eisenberg and Gale and that of Shmyrev, namely that their duals are equivalent up to a change of variables. Both programs capture equilibria of linear Fisher markets. By adding suitable constraints to Shmyrev's program, we obtain a convex program that captures equilibria of the spending-restricted market model defined by [7] in the context of the NSW maximization problem. Further, adding certain integral constraints to this program we get the integer program for the NSW mentioned above. The basic tool we use is convex programming duality. In the special case of convex programs with linear constraints (but convex objectives), we show a particularly simple way of obtaining dual programs, putting it almost at par with linear program duality. This simple way of finding duals has been used subsequently for many other applications. △ Less

Submitted 21 September, 2016; originally announced September 2016.

Comments: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1603.01257

Nash Social Welfare Approximation for Strategic Agents

Authors: Simina Brânzei, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Ruta Mehta

Abstract: 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… ▽ More 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 $(1+ε)$ for every $ε> 0$. 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. △ Less

Submitted 12 May, 2017; v1 submitted 6 July, 2016; originally announced July 2016.

Mechanism Design for Fair Division

Authors: Richard Cole, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Gagan Goel

Abstract: We revisit the classic problem of fair division from a mechanism design perspective, using {\em Proportional Fairness} as a benchmark. In particular, we aim to allocate a collection of divisible items to a set of agents while incentivizing the agents to be truthful in reporting their valuations. For the very large class of homogeneous valuations, we design a truthful mechanism that provides {\em e… ▽ More We revisit the classic problem of fair division from a mechanism design perspective, using {\em Proportional Fairness} as a benchmark. In particular, we aim to allocate a collection of divisible items to a set of agents while incentivizing the agents to be truthful in reporting their valuations. For the very large class of homogeneous valuations, we design a truthful mechanism that provides {\em every agent} with at least a $1/e\approx 0.368$ fraction of her Proportionally Fair valuation. To complement this result, we show that no truthful mechanism can guarantee more than a $0.5$ fraction, even for the restricted class of additive linear valuations. We also propose another mechanism for additive linear valuations that works really well when every item is highly demanded. To guarantee truthfulness, our mechanisms discard a carefully chosen fraction of the allocated resources; we conclude by uncovering interesting connections between our mechanisms and known mechanisms that use money instead. △ Less

Submitted 24 February, 2014; v1 submitted 6 December, 2012; originally announced December 2012.

Comments: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1203.4627

Truthfulness, Proportional Fairness, and Efficiency

Authors: Richard Cole, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Gagan Goel

Abstract: How does one allocate a collection of resources to a set of strategic agents in a fair and efficient manner without using money? For in many scenarios it is not feasible to use money to compensate agents for otherwise unsatisfactory outcomes. This paper studies this question, looking at both fairness and efficiency measures. We employ the proportionally fair solution, which is a well-known fairn… ▽ More How does one allocate a collection of resources to a set of strategic agents in a fair and efficient manner without using money? For in many scenarios it is not feasible to use money to compensate agents for otherwise unsatisfactory outcomes. This paper studies this question, looking at both fairness and efficiency measures. We employ the proportionally fair solution, which is a well-known fairness concept for money-free settings. But although finding a proportionally fair solution is computationally tractable, it cannot be implemented in a truthful fashion. Consequently, we seek approximate solutions. We give several truthful mechanisms which achieve proportional fairness in an approximate sense. We use a strong notion of approximation, requiring the mechanism to give each agent a good approximation of its proportionally fair utility. In particular, one of our mechanisms provides a better and better approximation factor as the minimum demand for every good increases. A motivating example is provided by the massive privatization auction in the Czech republic in the early 90s. With regard to efficiency, prior work has shown a lower bound of 0.5 on the approximation factor of any swap-dictatorial mechanism approximating a social welfare measure even for the two agents and multiple goods case. We surpass this lower bound by designing a non-swap-dictatorial mechanism for this case. Interestingly, the new mechanism builds on the notion of proportional fairness. △ Less

Submitted 6 July, 2012; v1 submitted 20 March, 2012; originally announced March 2012.

Inner Product Spaces for MinSum Coordination Mechanisms

Authors: Richard Cole, José R. Correa, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Vahab Mirrokni, Neil Olver

Abstract: We study policies aiming to minimize the weighted sum of completion times of jobs in the context of coordination mechanisms for selfish scheduling problems. Our goal is to design local policies that achieve a good price of anarchy in the resulting equilibria for unrelated machine scheduling. To obtain the approximation bounds, we introduce a new technique that while conceptually simple, seems to b… ▽ More We study policies aiming to minimize the weighted sum of completion times of jobs in the context of coordination mechanisms for selfish scheduling problems. Our goal is to design local policies that achieve a good price of anarchy in the resulting equilibria for unrelated machine scheduling. To obtain the approximation bounds, we introduce a new technique that while conceptually simple, seems to be quite powerful. With this method we are able to prove the following results. First, we consider Smith's Rule, which orders the jobs on a machine in ascending processing time to weight ratio, and show that it achieves an approximation ratio of 4. We also demonstrate that this is the best possible for deterministic non-preemptive strongly local policies. Since Smith's Rule is always optimal for a given assignment, this may seem unsurprising, but we then show that better approximation ratios can be obtained if either preemption or randomization is allowed. We prove that ProportionalSharing, a preemptive strongly local policy, achieves an approximation ratio of 2.618 for the weighted sum of completion times, and an approximation ratio of 2.5 in the unweighted case. Again, we observe that these bounds are tight. Next, we consider Rand, a natural non-preemptive but randomized policy. We show that it achieves an approximation ratio of at most 2.13; moreover, if the sum of the weighted completion times is negligible compared to the cost of the optimal solution, this improves to π/2. Finally, we show that both ProportionalSharing and Rand induce potential games, and thus always have a pure Nash equilibrium (unlike Smith's Rule). This also allows us to design the first \emph{combinatorial} constant-factor approximation algorithm minimizing weighted completion time for unrelated machine scheduling that achieves a factor of 2+ εfor any ε> 0. △ Less

Submitted 22 December, 2010; v1 submitted 9 October, 2010; originally announced October 2010.

Comments: 24 pages