Fair Division of Indivisible Goods

In this paper, we study the problem of allocating indivisible goods among agents in a fair way. Envy-freeness and Pareto optimality have been used extensively to assess the fairness of allocation. Since envy-free allocations are not guaranteed to exist for indivisible goods. We utilize a relaxed version of envy-freeness called envy-freeness up to one less preferred good (EFL) which states that an allocation is fair if no agent prefers another agent’s bundle after removing an item from the other agent’s bundle that is valued less than the agent’s bundle or the other agent’s bundle has at most one good that is positively valued by the agent. We establish the existence of allocations that satisfies EFL in conjunction with Pareto optimality under additive valuations by providing a polynomial time algorithm. Moreover, we study Nash welfare associated with the algorithm and empirically demonstrate higher values when compared to the existing approximation of maximum Nash welfare solution over a large set of randomly generated instances.

[1]  E. Eisenberg,et al.  CONSENSUS OF SUBJECTIVE PROBABILITIES: THE PARI-MUTUEL METHOD, , 1959 .

[2]  Hervé Moulin,et al.  Fair division and collective welfare , 2003 .

[3]  Elchanan Mossel,et al.  On approximately fair allocations of indivisible goods , 2004, EC '04.

[4]  Eric Budish,et al.  The Combinatorial Assignment Problem: Approximate Competitive Equilibrium from Equal Incomes , 2010, Journal of Political Economy.

[5]  Kurt Mehlhorn,et al.  Certifying algorithms , 2011, Comput. Sci. Rev..

[6]  Jörg Rothe,et al.  Computational complexity and approximability of social welfare optimization in multiagent resource allocation , 2012, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[7]  Sylvain Bouveret,et al.  Characterizing conflicts in fair division of indivisible goods using a scale of criteria , 2016, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[8]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Online Fair Division: Analysing a Food Bank Problem , 2015, IJCAI.

[9]  Richard Cole,et al.  Approximating the Nash Social Welfare with Indivisible Items , 2015, SECO.

[10]  Ariel D. Procaccia,et al.  The Unreasonable Fairness of Maximum Nash Welfare , 2016, EC.

[11]  Judd B. Kessler,et al.  Course Match: A Large-Scale Implementation of Approximate Competitive Equilibrium from Equal Incomes for Combinatorial Allocation , 2015, Oper. Res..

[12]  Mohit Singh,et al.  Nash Social Welfare, Matrix Permanent, and Stable Polynomials , 2016, ITCS.

[13]  Siddharth Barman,et al.  Approximation Algorithms for Maximin Fair Division , 2017, EC.

[14]  Euiwoong Lee,et al.  APX-hardness of maximizing Nash social welfare with indivisible items , 2015, Inf. Process. Lett..

[15]  Martin Hoefer,et al.  Approximating the Nash Social Welfare with Budget-Additive Valuations , 2017, SODA.

[16]  Richard Cole,et al.  Approximating the Nash Social Welfare with Indivisible Items , 2018, SIAM J. Comput..

[17]  Y. Narahari,et al.  Groupwise Maximin Fair Allocation of Indivisible Goods , 2017, AAAI.

[18]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Almost Envy-Freeness with General Valuations , 2017, SODA.

[19]  Vijay V. Vazirani,et al.  Nash Social Welfare for Indivisible Items under Separable, Piecewise-Linear Concave Utilities , 2016, SODA.

[20]  Ioannis Caragiannis,et al.  Knowledge, Fairness, and Social Constraints , 2018, AAAI.