290 likes | 449 Views
Approximate Mechanism Design Without Money. Ariel Procaccia Center for Research on Computation and Society Harvard University. Algorithmic game theory. Computing solution concepts Quantifying the inefficiency of equilibria
E N D
Approximate Mechanism Design Without Money Ariel Procaccia Center for Research on Computation and Society Harvard University
Algorithmic game theory • Computing solution concepts • Quantifying the inefficiency of equilibria • Incentives in communication networks, P2P systems, and reputation systems • Computational mechanism design
Overview Facility location Approximate mechanism design w/o money Approximate mechanism design w/o money Kidney exchange Kidney exchange
The model • Want to locate a public facility (library, train station, fire station) on a street • Players A, B, C,... report their ideal locations • A mechanism receives the reported locations as input, and returns the location of the facility • Given facility location, cost of a player = his distance from the facility
Take 1: average • Suppose we have two players, A and B • Mechanism: take the average • A mechanism is strategyproof if players can never benefit from lying = the distance from their location cannot decrease by misreporting it • Problem: average is not strategyproof
Take 2: leftmost location • Mechanism: select the leftmost reported location • Mechanism is strategyproof A B B C D E
Minimizing the maximum cost • Maximum cost of facility location = max distance to the players • Example: facility is a fire station • Optimal solution = average of leftmost and rightmost locations; OPT = d(A,E)/2 • Mechanism gives -approximationif for every instance, MECH/OPT • Leftmost location gives 2-approximation • Theorem:There is no deterministic strategyproof mechanism with approx ratio smaller than 2 A C D E B
The Left-Right-Middle Mechanism • Left-Right-Middle (LRM) Mechanism: select leftmost location with prob. ¼, rightmost with prob. ¼, and average with prob. ½ • Approx ratio is[½ (2 OPT) + ½ OPT] / OPT = 3/2 • LRM mechanism is strategyproof • Theorem:There is no randomized strategyproof mechanism with approximation ratio better than 3/2 2 B B C A D E 1/2 1/4 1/2 1/4 1/4
Facility location on a network • Players located on a network, represented as graph [SV04] • Examples: • Network of roads in a city • Telecommunications network: • Line • Hierarchical (tree) • Ring (circle) • Scheduling a daily task: circle A B C
LRM on a circle • Semicircle like an interval on a line • If all players are on one semicircle, can apply LRM • Meaningless otherwise 1/4 A B C F D 1/2 E 1/4
Random Midpoint • Look at points antipodal to players’ locations • Random Midpoint Mechanism: choose midpoint of arc between two antipodal points with prob. proportional to length • Theorem: mechanism is strategyproof • Approx ratio 3/2 if players are not on one semicircle, but 3 if they are B 1/4 A 3/8 C C A B 3/8
A hybrid mechanism • Mechanism: • If players are on one semicircle, use LRM Mechanism • If players are not on one semicircle, use Random Midpoint Mechanism • Theorem: Mechanism is SP and gives 3/2-approximation when network is a circle • Lower bound of 3/2 holds on a circle
Overview Facility location Facility location Approximate mechanism design w/o money Kidney exchange Kidney exchange
Approx MD w/o money for CS • Algorithmic mechanism design (AMD) was introduced by Nisan and Ronen [STOC 1999] • The field deals with designing strategyproof (incentive compatible) approximation mechanisms for game-theoretic versions of optimization problems • All the work in the field considers mechanisms with payments • Keywords: without money
Class 1 Opt SP mechanism with money Problem is intractable Opt SP mech with money + tractable Class 3 No opt SP mech w/o money Class 2 No opt SP mech with money
Approx MD w/o money for econ • Work in econ on MD without money • Single peaked preferences • House allocation • Stable matching • No optimization target • Keyword: approximation
In some settings, approximation facilitates truthfulness without money
Work on approx MD w/o money • Facility location • [PT09,AFPT10,NST10,LWZ09,LSWZ10,Thang10,TAY10,FT10] • Machine learning • [DFP10,MPR08,MPR09,MPR10,MAMR11] • Approval voting • [AFPT10,CKM10] • Allocation of items • [GCR09,GC10] • Generalized assignment • [DG10] • Kidney exchange • [AFKP10]
Overview Facility location Facility location Approximate mechanism design w/o money Approximate mechanism design w/o money Kidney exchange
Motivation • Many types of kidney disease require transplantation • Potential donors may be incompatible with patient • Pairs of incompatible donor-patient pairs can sometimes exchange kidneys • Monetary transfers illegal • Previous work considered the donor/patient incentives • [Roth+Sonmez+Unver] Hospitals’ incentives may become a problem
The model • Undirected graph • Vertices = donor-patient pairs • Edges = compatibility • Each player controls subset of vertices • Mechanism receives a graph and returns a matching • Utility of players = number of its matched vertices • Target: efficiency = # matched vertices • Strategy: subset of revealed vertices • But edges are public knowledge • Mechanism is strategyproof (SP) if it is a dominant strategy to reveal all vertices
A strategyproof mechanism • Let = (1,2) be a bipartition of the players • The Match mechanism: • Consider matchings that maximize the number of “internal edges” and do not have any edges between different players on the same side of the partition • Among these return a matching with max cardinality (need tie breaking)
Results • Theorem (main): Match is SP for any number of players and any partition • For two players Match{1},{2} gives a 2-approx • For more gives no approximation • The Mix-and-Match mechanism: • Mix: choose a random partition • Match: Execute Match • Theorem: Mix-and-Match is universally SP and gives a 2-approx (!) • In simulations gives 90% efficiency
Bibliographic notes • Approximate mechanism design without moneyWith Moshe Tennenholtz (EC 2009) • Strategyproof approximation of the minimax on networksWith NogaAlon, Michal Feldman, and Moshe Tennenholtz (Math. of OR 2010) • Mix and MatchWith ItaiAshlagi, Felix Fischer, and Ian Kash (EC 2010) • Available from my website
(Some of) my research interests • Economics: • Game theory and mechanism design • Social choice • Fair division • Computer science: • AI: multiagent systems, machine learning, decision making under uncertainty • Combinatorial optimization and approximation algorithms • Human computation