-
Multi-Objective LQR with Linear Scalarization
Authors:
Ali Jadbabaie,
Devavrat Shah,
Sean R. Sinclair
Abstract:
The framework of decision-making, modeled as a Markov Decision Process (MDP), typically assumes a single objective. However, most practical scenarios involve considering tradeoffs between multiple objectives. With that as the motivation, we consider the task of finding the Pareto front of achievable tradeoffs in the context of Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR), a canonical example of a continuous,…
▽ More
The framework of decision-making, modeled as a Markov Decision Process (MDP), typically assumes a single objective. However, most practical scenarios involve considering tradeoffs between multiple objectives. With that as the motivation, we consider the task of finding the Pareto front of achievable tradeoffs in the context of Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR), a canonical example of a continuous, infinite horizon MDP. As our first contribution, we establish that the Pareto front for LQR is characterized by linear scalarization, wherein a linear combination of the objectives creates a single objective, and by varying the weight of the linear combination one achieves different possible tradeoffs. That is, each tradeoff point on the Pareto front of multi-objective LQR turns out to be a single objective LQR where the objective is a convex combination of the multiple objectives. Intellectually, our work provides an important example of linear scalarization being sufficient for a non-convex multi-objective problem. As our second contribution, we establish the smoothness of the Pareto front, showing that the optimal control to an $ε$-perturbation to a scalarization parameter yields an $O(ε)$-approximation to its objective performance. Together these results highlight a simple algorithm to approximate the continuous Pareto front by optimizing over a grid of scalarization parameters. Unlike other scalarization methods, each individual optimization problem retains the structure of a single objective LQR problem, making them computationally feasible. Lastly, we extend the results to consider certainty equivalence, where the unknown dynamics are replaced with estimates.
△ Less
Submitted 8 August, 2024;
originally announced August 2024.
-
Online Fair Allocation of Perishable Resources
Authors:
Siddhartha Banerjee,
Chamsi Hssaine,
Sean R. Sinclair
Abstract:
We consider a practically motivated variant of the canonical online fair allocation problem: a decision-maker has a budget of perishable resources to allocate over a fixed number of rounds. Each round sees a random number of arrivals, and the decision-maker must commit to an allocation for these individuals before moving on to the next round. The goal is to construct a sequence of allocations that…
▽ More
We consider a practically motivated variant of the canonical online fair allocation problem: a decision-maker has a budget of perishable resources to allocate over a fixed number of rounds. Each round sees a random number of arrivals, and the decision-maker must commit to an allocation for these individuals before moving on to the next round. The goal is to construct a sequence of allocations that is envy-free and efficient. Our work makes two important contributions toward this problem: we first derive strong lower bounds on the optimal envy-efficiency trade-off that demonstrate that a decision-maker is fundamentally limited in what she can hope to achieve relative to the no-perishing setting; we then design an algorithm achieving these lower bounds which takes as input $(i)$ a prediction of the perishing order, and $(ii)$ a desired bound on envy. Given the remaining budget in each period, the algorithm uses forecasts of future demand and perishing to adaptively choose one of two carefully constructed guardrail quantities. We demonstrate our algorithm's strong numerical performance - and state-of-the-art, perishing-agnostic algorithms' inefficacy - on simulations calibrated to a real-world dataset.
△ Less
Submitted 4 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
Sequential Fair Allocation: Achieving the Optimal Envy-Efficiency Tradeoff Curve
Authors:
Sean R. Sinclair,
Gauri Jain,
Siddhartha Banerjee,
Christina Lee Yu
Abstract:
We consider the problem of dividing limited resources to individuals arriving over $T$ rounds. Each round has a random number of individuals arrive, and individuals can be characterized by their type (i.e. preferences over the different resources). A standard notion of 'fairness' in this setting is that an allocation simultaneously satisfy envy-freeness and efficiency. The former is an individual…
▽ More
We consider the problem of dividing limited resources to individuals arriving over $T$ rounds. Each round has a random number of individuals arrive, and individuals can be characterized by their type (i.e. preferences over the different resources). A standard notion of 'fairness' in this setting is that an allocation simultaneously satisfy envy-freeness and efficiency. The former is an individual guarantee, requiring that each agent prefers their own allocation over the allocation of any other; in contrast, efficiency is a global property, requiring that the allocations clear the available resources. For divisible resources, when the number of individuals of each type are known upfront, the above desiderata are simultaneously achievable for a large class of utility functions. However, in an online setting when the number of individuals of each type are only revealed round by round, no policy can guarantee these desiderata simultaneously, and hence the best one can do is to try and allocate so as to approximately satisfy the two properties.
We show that in the online setting, the two desired properties (envy-freeness and efficiency) are in direct contention, in that any algorithm achieving additive counterfactual envy-freeness up to a factor of $L_T$ necessarily suffers a efficiency loss of at least $1 / L_T$. We complement this uncertainty principle with a simple algorithm, HopeGuardrail, which allocates resources based on an adaptive threshold policy and is able to achieve any fairness-efficiency point on this frontier. In simulation results, our algorithm provides allocations close to the optimal fair solution in hindsight, motivating its use in practical applications as the algorithm is able to adapt to any desired fairness efficiency trade-off.
△ Less
Submitted 29 September, 2022; v1 submitted 11 May, 2021;
originally announced May 2021.
-
Sequential Fair Allocation of Limited Resources under Stochastic Demands
Authors:
Sean R. Sinclair,
Gauri Jain,
Siddhartha Banerjee,
Christina Lee Yu
Abstract:
We consider the problem of dividing limited resources between a set of agents arriving sequentially with unknown (stochastic) utilities. Our goal is to find a fair allocation - one that is simultaneously Pareto-efficient and envy-free. When all utilities are known upfront, the above desiderata are simultaneously achievable (and efficiently computable) for a large class of utility functions. In a s…
▽ More
We consider the problem of dividing limited resources between a set of agents arriving sequentially with unknown (stochastic) utilities. Our goal is to find a fair allocation - one that is simultaneously Pareto-efficient and envy-free. When all utilities are known upfront, the above desiderata are simultaneously achievable (and efficiently computable) for a large class of utility functions. In a sequential setting, however, no policy can guarantee these desiderata simultaneously for all possible utility realizations. A natural online fair allocation objective is to minimize the deviation of each agent's final allocation from their fair allocation in hindsight. This translates into simultaneous guarantees for both Pareto-efficiency and envy-freeness. However, the resulting dynamic program has state-space which is exponential in the number of agents. We propose a simple policy, HopeOnline, that instead aims to `match' the ex-post fair allocation vector using the current available resources and `predicted' histogram of future utilities. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our policy compared to other heurstics on a dataset inspired by mobile food-bank allocations.
△ Less
Submitted 9 July, 2022; v1 submitted 29 November, 2020;
originally announced November 2020.
