Fair Allocation in Dynamic Mechanism Design
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper explores the challenges of fair allocation in dynamic mechanism design, where resources or goods need to be allocated over time to agents with changing preferences.
- The researchers propose a novel solution that aims to balance fairness, efficiency, and incentive compatibility in dynamic settings.
- The paper builds on previous work in related fields, fair pricing, and resource allocation mechanisms.
Plain English Explanation
The paper tackles the problem of fairly distributing a limited resource or good over time to different people or agents. This is a common challenge in many real-world situations, such as allocating job opportunities, housing, or access to a shared facility.
In a dynamic setting, the agents' preferences and needs can change over time, making it difficult to find a fair and efficient allocation. The researchers propose a new approach that tries to balance three key goals:
- Fairness: Ensuring that each agent receives a fair share of the resource, without unfairly favoring some agents over others.
- Efficiency: Maximizing the overall value or utility generated by the allocation, rather than just focusing on fairness.
- Incentive compatibility: Designing the allocation mechanism in a way that encourages agents to truthfully report their preferences, rather than trying to game the system.
By addressing these competing objectives, the researchers hope to develop a more robust and practical solution for fair allocation in dynamic settings, which could have applications in a wide range of real-world scenarios.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents a novel approach to fair allocation in dynamic mechanism design, building on concepts from related research and online market design.
The key elements of the proposed solution include:
- Dynamic allocation algorithm: The researchers develop a dynamic allocation algorithm that makes decisions over time, taking into account the changing preferences and needs of the agents.
- Fairness objective: The algorithm incorporates a fairness objective that aims to ensure each agent receives a fair share of the resource, based on a notion of proportional fairness.
- Incentive compatibility: The mechanism is designed to be incentive compatible, meaning agents have no incentive to misreport their preferences and will instead truthfully reveal their needs.
- Theoretical analysis: The paper provides a thorough theoretical analysis of the proposed mechanism, including proofs of its key properties and performance guarantees.
The researchers evaluate their approach through simulations and demonstrate its effectiveness in balancing fairness, efficiency, and incentive compatibility in dynamic settings.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a well-designed and theoretically grounded solution to the challenge of fair allocation in dynamic mechanism design. However, there are a few potential limitations and areas for further research:
- Real-world applicability: While the theoretical analysis is rigorous, the practical implementation and deployment of the proposed mechanism in real-world settings may face additional challenges, such as handling incomplete information or complex agent interactions.
- Scalability: The computational complexity of the dynamic allocation algorithm may limit its scalability to large-scale problems with many agents and resources.
- Robustness to strategic behavior: The incentive compatibility guarantee assumes that agents will truthfully report their preferences, but in practice, some agents may still try to game the system to their advantage.
Further research could explore ways to address these limitations, such as developing more efficient algorithms, incorporating techniques to handle strategic behavior, or investigating alternative fairness objectives that better align with real-world needs.
Conclusion
This paper presents a novel approach to fair allocation in dynamic mechanism design, addressing the key challenges of balancing fairness, efficiency, and incentive compatibility. The researchers have developed a theoretically sound solution that could have significant implications for a wide range of resource allocation problems in dynamic settings, from job markets to housing assignments to shared facility access.
While the proposed mechanism has some potential limitations, the paper's contributions represent an important step forward in the field of dynamic mechanism design, paving the way for further research and practical applications that can help create more equitable and efficient systems for resource allocation.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Fair Allocation in Dynamic Mechanism Design
Alireza Fallah, Michael I. Jordan, Annie Ulichney
We consider a dynamic mechanism design problem where an auctioneer sells an indivisible good to two groups of buyers in every round, for a total of $T$ rounds. The auctioneer aims to maximize their discounted overall revenue while adhering to a fairness constraint that guarantees a minimum average allocation for each group. We begin by studying the static case ($T=1$) and establish that the optimal mechanism involves two types of subsidization: one that increases the overall probability of allocation to all buyers, and another that favors the group which otherwise has a lower probability of winning the item. We then extend our results to the dynamic case by characterizing a set of recursive functions that determine the optimal allocation and payments in each round. Notably, our results establish that in the dynamic case, the seller, on the one hand, commits to a participation reward to incentivize truth-telling, and on the other hand, charges an entry fee for every round. Moreover, the optimal allocation once more involves subsidization in favor of one group, where the extent of subsidization depends on the difference in future utilities for both the seller and buyers when allocating the item to one group versus the other. Finally, we present an approximation scheme to solve the recursive equations and determine an approximately optimal and fair allocation efficiently.
Read more6/18/2024
🏋️
0
Fair Incentives for Repeated Engagement
Daniel Freund, Chamsi Hssaine
We study a decision-maker's problem of finding optimal monetary incentive schemes for retention when faced with agents whose participation decisions (stochastically) depend on the incentive they receive. Our focus is on policies constrained to fulfill two fairness properties that preclude outcomes wherein different groups of agents experience different treatment on average. We formulate the problem as a high-dimensional stochastic optimization problem, and study it through the use of a closely related deterministic variant. We show that the optimal static solution to this deterministic variant is asymptotically optimal for the dynamic problem under fairness constraints. Though solving for the optimal static solution gives rise to a non-convex optimization problem, we uncover a structural property that allows us to design a tractable, fast-converging heuristic policy. Traditional schemes for retention ignore fairness constraints; indeed, the goal in these is to use differentiation to incentivize repeated engagement with the system. Our work (i) shows that even in the absence of explicit discrimination, dynamic policies may unintentionally discriminate between agents of different types by varying the type composition of the system, and (ii) presents an asymptotically optimal policy to avoid such discriminatory outcomes.
Read more7/31/2024
👀
0
Fairness Incentives in Response to Unfair Dynamic Pricing
Jesse Thibodeau, Hadi Nekoei, Afaf Taik, Janarthanan Rajendran, Golnoosh Farnadi
The use of dynamic pricing by profit-maximizing firms gives rise to demand fairness concerns, measured by discrepancies in consumer groups' demand responses to a given pricing strategy. Notably, dynamic pricing may result in buyer distributions unreflective of those of the underlying population, which can be problematic in markets where fair representation is socially desirable. To address this, policy makers might leverage tools such as taxation and subsidy to adapt policy mechanisms dependent upon their social objective. In this paper, we explore the potential for AI methods to assist such intervention strategies. To this end, we design a basic simulated economy, wherein we introduce a dynamic social planner (SP) to generate corporate taxation schedules geared to incentivizing firms towards adopting fair pricing behaviours, and to use the collected tax budget to subsidize consumption among underrepresented groups. To cover a range of possible policy scenarios, we formulate our social planner's learning problem as a multi-armed bandit, a contextual bandit and finally as a full reinforcement learning (RL) problem, evaluating welfare outcomes from each case. To alleviate the difficulty in retaining meaningful tax rates that apply to less frequently occurring brackets, we introduce FairReplayBuffer, which ensures that our RL agent samples experiences uniformly across a discretized fairness space. We find that, upon deploying a learned tax and redistribution policy, social welfare improves on that of the fairness-agnostic baseline, and approaches that of the analytically optimal fairness-aware baseline for the multi-armed and contextual bandit settings, and surpassing it by 13.19% in the full RL setting.
Read more4/24/2024
0
Deep Automated Mechanism Design for Integrating Ad Auction and Allocation in Feed
Xuejian Li, Ze Wang, Bingqi Zhu, Fei He, Yongkang Wang, Xingxing Wang
E-commerce platforms usually present an ordered list, mixed with several organic items and an advertisement, in response to each user's page view request. This list, the outcome of ad auction and allocation processes, directly impacts the platform's ad revenue and gross merchandise volume (GMV). Specifically, the ad auction determines which ad is displayed and the corresponding payment, while the ad allocation decides the display positions of the advertisement and organic items. The prevalent methods of segregating the ad auction and allocation into two distinct stages face two problems: 1) Ad auction does not consider externalities, such as the influence of actual display position and context on ad Click-Through Rate (CTR); 2) The ad allocation, which utilizes the auction-winning ad's payment to determine the display position dynamically, fails to maintain incentive compatibility (IC) for the advertisement. For instance, in the auction stage employing the traditional Generalized Second Price (GSP) , even if the winning ad increases its bid, its payment remains unchanged. This implies that the advertisement cannot secure a better position and thus loses the opportunity to achieve higher utility in the subsequent ad allocation stage. Previous research often focused on one of the two stages, neglecting the two-stage problem, which may result in suboptimal outcomes...
Read more4/12/2024