Mechanism Design for Locating Facilities with Capacities with Insufficient Resources
0
Sign in to get full access
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
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 more7/29/2024
📈
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 more4/16/2024
🌐
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 more6/17/2024
💬
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 more6/14/2024