Facility Location Games Beyond Single-Peakedness: the Entrance Fee Model

Read original: arXiv:2204.11282 - Published 4/16/2024 by Mengfan Ma, Mingyu Xiao, Tian Bai, Bakh Khoussainov
Total Score

0

📈

Sign in to get full access

or

If you already have an account, we'll log you in

Overview

  • The paper introduces a novel model for the facility location game, where each facility charges an entrance fee in addition to the distance-based cost.
  • This departure from the classical model, where cost is solely determined by distance, introduces additional challenges as agents' preferences may no longer be single-peaked.
  • The researchers systematically study this new model, designing strategy-proof mechanisms with favorable approximation ratios and complementing them with nearly-tight impossibility results.

Plain English Explanation

In the classical facility location game, each agent's cost is determined solely by the distance to the nearest facility. This paper introduces a new model where each facility also charges an entrance fee. So the total cost for an agent includes both the distance to the facility and the fee charged by that facility.

This change in the cost structure means that agents' preferences may no longer be simple and straightforward (i.e., single-peaked). For example, an agent might prefer a facility that is slightly farther away but charges a lower entrance fee, over a closer facility with a higher fee.

The researchers thoroughly investigate this new model, developing strategy-proof mechanisms that provide good approximations to the optimal solution. They also prove limits on how well any mechanism can perform, showing that their results are close to the best possible.

Technical Explanation

The paper studies the facility location game in a setting where each facility charges an entrance fee, in addition to the distance-based cost. This causes agents' preferences to potentially lose the single-peaked property that is present in the classical model.

The researchers design strategy-proof mechanisms that provide good approximation guarantees for both utilitarian and egalitarian objectives. For one-facility and two-facility games, they provide upper and lower bounds on the approximation ratios achievable by deterministic and randomized mechanisms.

These results demonstrate the challenges introduced by the entrance fee model and the researchers' ability to navigate them to develop near-optimal mechanisms.

Critical Analysis

The paper acknowledges that the introduction of facility entrance fees complicates the classical facility location game, as agents' preferences may no longer be single-peaked. However, it does not discuss the real-world relevance or significance of this change in the cost structure.

While the researchers develop strategy-proof mechanisms with favorable approximation guarantees, it would be valuable to understand the practical implications of these results. For example, how often do such entrance fee-based facility location games arise, and what are the potential benefits or drawbacks of this model compared to the classical setting?

Additionally, the paper focuses solely on the theoretical analysis and does not provide any empirical evaluation or validation of the proposed mechanisms. Incorporating real-world data or simulations could help assess the practical relevance and effectiveness of the researchers' approach.

Conclusion

This paper introduces a novel model for the facility location game, where each facility charges an entrance fee in addition to the distance-based cost. This change in the cost structure complicates the agents' preferences, as they may no longer be single-peaked.

The researchers systematically study this new model, designing strategy-proof mechanisms with favorable approximation ratios and providing nearly-tight impossibility results. These theoretical insights contribute to the understanding of mechanism design in the context of facility location problems with more complex cost structures.

While the paper presents important technical advancements, further research is needed to assess the real-world relevance and practical implications of this new facility location model. Incorporating empirical evaluation and exploring the potential benefits or drawbacks compared to the classical setting could strengthen the impact of this work.



This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Follow @aimodelsfyi on 𝕏 →

Related Papers

📈

Total Score

0

Facility Location Games Beyond Single-Peakedness: the Entrance Fee Model

Mengfan Ma, Mingyu Xiao, Tian Bai, Bakh Khoussainov

The facility location game has been studied extensively in mechanism design. In the classical model, each agent's cost is solely determined by her distance to the nearest facility. In this paper, we introduce a novel model where each facility charges an entrance fee. Thus, the cost of each agent is determined by both the distance to the facility and the entrance fee of the facility. In our model, the entrance fee function is allowed to be an arbitrary function, causing agents' preferences may no longer be single-peaked anymore: This departure from the classical model introduces additional challenges. We systematically delve into the intricacies of the model, designing strategyproof mechanisms with favorable approximation ratios. Additionally, we complement these ratios with nearly-tight impossibility results. Specifically, for one-facility and two-facility games, we provide upper and lower bounds for the approximation ratios given by deterministic and randomized mechanisms with respect to utilitarian and egalitarian objectives.

Read more

4/16/2024

🌐

Total Score

0

Two-Stage Facility Location Games with Strategic Clients and Facilities

Simon Krogmann, Pascal Lenzner, Louise Molitor, Alexander Skopalik

We consider non-cooperative facility location games where both facilities and clients act strategically and heavily influence each other. This contrasts established game-theoretic facility location models with non-strategic clients that simply select the closest opened facility. In our model, every facility location has a set of attracted clients and each client has a set of shopping locations and a weight that corresponds to her spending capacity. Facility agents selfishly select a location for opening their facility to maximize the attracted total spending capacity, whereas clients strategically decide how to distribute their spending capacity among the opened facilities in their shopping range. We focus on a natural client behavior similar to classical load balancing: our selfish clients aim for a distribution that minimizes their maximum waiting times for getting serviced, where a facility's waiting time corresponds to its total attracted client weight. We show that subgame perfect equilibria exist and give almost tight constant bounds on the Price of Anarchy and the Price of Stability, which even hold for a broader class of games with arbitrary client behavior. Since facilities and clients influence each other, it is crucial for the facilities to anticipate the selfish clients' behavior when selecting their location. For this, we provide an efficient algorithm that also implies an efficient check for equilibrium. Finally, we show that computing a socially optimal facility placement is NP-hard and that this result holds for all feasible client weight distributions.

Read more

6/17/2024

💬

Total Score

0

Strategic Facility Location with Clients that Minimize Total Waiting Time

Simon Krogmann, Pascal Lenzner, Alexander Skopalik

We study a non-cooperative two-sided facility location game in which facilities and clients behave strategically. This is in contrast to many other facility location games in which clients simply visit their closest facility. Facility agents select a location on a graph to open a facility to attract as much purchasing power as possible, while client agents choose which facilities to patronize by strategically distributing their purchasing power in order to minimize their total waiting time. Here, the waiting time of a facility depends on its received total purchasing power. We show that our client stage is an atomic splittable congestion game, which implies existence, uniqueness and efficient computation of a client equilibrium. Therefore, facility agents can efficiently predict client behavior and make strategic decisions accordingly. Despite that, we prove that subgame perfect equilibria do not exist in all instances of this game and that their existence is NP-hard to decide. On the positive side, we provide a simple and efficient algorithm to compute 3-approximate subgame perfect equilibria.

Read more

6/14/2024

Mechanism Design for Locating Facilities with Capacities with Insufficient Resources
Total Score

0

Mechanism Design for Locating Facilities with Capacities with Insufficient Resources

Gennaro Auricchio, Harry J. Clough, Jie Zhang

This paper explores the Mechanism Design aspects of the $m$-Capacitated Facility Location Problem where the total facility capacity is less than the number of agents. Following the framework outlined by Aziz et al., the Social Welfare of the facility location is determined through a First-Come-First-Served (FCFS) game, in which agents compete once the facility positions are established. When the number of facilities is $m > 1$, the Nash Equilibrium (NE) of the FCFS game is not unique, making the utility of the agents and the concept of truthfulness unclear. To tackle these issues, we consider absolutely truthful mechanisms, i.e. mechanisms that prevent agents from misreporting regardless of the strategies used during the FCFS game. We combine this stricter truthfulness requirement with the notion of Equilibrium Stable (ES) mechanisms, which are mechanisms whose Social Welfare does not depend on the NE of the FCFS game. We demonstrate that the class of percentile mechanisms is absolutely truthful and identify the conditions under which they are ES. We also show that the approximation ratio of each ES percentile mechanism is bounded and determine its value. Notably, when all the facilities have the same capacity and the number of agents is sufficiently large, it is possible to achieve an approximation ratio smaller than $1+frac{1}{2m-1}$. Finally, we extend our study to encompass higher-dimensional problems. Within this framework, we demonstrate that the class of ES percentile mechanisms is even more restricted and characterize the mechanisms that are both ES and absolutely truthful. We further support our findings by empirically evaluating the performance of the mechanisms when the agents are the samples of a distribution.

Read more

7/29/2024