Bulow-Klemperer-Style Results for Welfare Maximization in Two-Sided Markets

We consider the problem of welfare maximization in two-sided markets using simple mechanisms that are prior-independent. The Myerson-Satterthwaite impossibility theorem shows that even for bilateral trade, there is no feasible (IR, truthful, budget balanced) mechanism that has welfare as high as the optimal-yet-infeasible VCG mechanism, which attains maximal welfare but runs a deficit. On the other hand, the optimal feasible mechanism needs to be carefully tailored to the Bayesian prior, and is extremely complex, eluding a precise description. We present Bulow-Klemperer-style results to circumvent these hurdles in double-auction markets. We suggest using the Buyer Trade Reduction (BTR) mechanism, a variant of McAfee's mechanism, which is feasible and simple (in particular, deterministic, truthful, prior-independent, anonymous). First, in the setting where buyers' and sellers' values are sampled i.i.d. from the same distribution, we show that for any such market of any size, BTR with one additional buyer whose value is sampled from the same distribution has expected welfare at least as high as the optimal in the original market. We then move to a more general setting where buyers' values are sampled from one distribution and sellers' from another, focusing on the case where the buyers' distribution first-order stochastically dominates the sellers'. We present bounds on the number of buyers that, when added, guarantees that BTR in the augmented market have welfare at least as high as the optimal in the original market. Our lower bounds extend to a large class of mechanisms, and all of our results extend to adding sellers instead of buyers. In addition, we present positive results about the usefulness of pricing at a sample for welfare maximization in two-sided markets under the above two settings, which to the best of our knowledge are the first sampling results in this context.

[1]  Silvio Micali,et al.  Parametric digital auctions , 2013, ITCS '13.

[2]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Revenue submodularity , 2009, EC '09.

[3]  Maria-Florina Balcan,et al.  Sample Complexity of Automated Mechanism Design , 2016, NIPS.

[4]  Nikhil R. Devanur,et al.  Prior-Independent Multi-parameter Mechanism Design , 2011, WINE.

[5]  Moshe Babaioff,et al.  Mechanisms for a spatially distributed market , 2004, EC '04.

[6]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Ironing in the Dark , 2015, EC.

[7]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Revenue maximization with a single sample , 2010, EC '10.

[8]  Yannai A. Gonczarowski,et al.  Efficient empirical revenue maximization in single-parameter auction environments , 2016, STOC.

[9]  Robert B. Wilson Game-Theoretic Analysis of Trading Processes. , 1985 .

[10]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  On the Pseudo-Dimension of Nearly Optimal Auctions , 2015, NIPS.

[11]  R. Preston McAfee,et al.  The Gains from Trade Under Fixed Price Mechanisms , 2007 .

[12]  Maria-Florina Balcan,et al.  A General Theory of Sample Complexity for Multi-Item Profit Maximization , 2017, EC.

[13]  R. McAfee,et al.  A dominant strategy double auction , 1992 .

[14]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Modularity and greed in double auctions , 2014, Games Econ. Behav..

[15]  Moshe Babaioff,et al.  Incentive-compatible, budget-balanced, yet highly efficient auctions for supply chain formation , 2003, EC '03.

[16]  Nikhil R. Devanur,et al.  The sample complexity of auctions with side information , 2015, STOC.

[17]  S. Matthew Weinberg,et al.  The Sample Complexity of Up-to-ε Multi-Dimensional Revenue Maximization , 2018, 2018 IEEE 59th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS).

[18]  Yang Cai,et al.  The Best of Both Worlds: Asymptotically Efficient Mechanisms with a Guarantee on the Expected Gains-From-Trade , 2018, EC.

[19]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Simple versus optimal mechanisms , 2009, EC '09.

[20]  Anna R. Karlin,et al.  A Prior-Independent Revenue-Maximizing Auction for Multiple Additive Bidders , 2016, WINE.

[21]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Making the Most of Your Samples , 2018, SIAM J. Comput..

[22]  T. Jaakkola,et al.  Models for Truthful Online Double Auctions , 2005 .

[23]  S. Matthew Weinberg,et al.  The Competition Complexity of Auctions: A Bulow-Klemperer Result for Multi-Dimensional Bidders , 2016, EC.

[24]  Jeremy I. Bulow,et al.  Auctions versus Negotiations , 1996 .

[25]  Moshe Babaioff,et al.  Are Two (Samples) Really Better Than One? On the Non-Asymptotic Performance of Empirical Revenue Maximization , 2018, ArXiv.

[26]  Liad Blumrosen,et al.  Approximating Gains-from-Trade in Bilateral Trading , 2016, WINE.

[27]  Anna R. Karlin,et al.  Truthful and Competitive Double Auctions , 2002, ESA.

[28]  Nicole Immorlica,et al.  Randomization Beats Second Price as a Prior-Independent Auction , 2015, EC.

[29]  Yang Cai,et al.  Approximating Gains from Trade in Two-sided Markets via Simple Mechanisms , 2017, EC.

[30]  Jason D. Hartline,et al.  Non-Revelation Mechanism Design , 2016, ArXiv.

[31]  Hu Fu,et al.  The Vickrey Auction with a Single Duplicate Bidder Approximates the Optimal Revenue , 2019, EC.

[32]  Ilya Segal,et al.  Optimal Pricing Mechanisms with Unknown Demand , 2002 .

[33]  M. Satterthwaite,et al.  Efficient Mechanisms for Bilateral Trading , 1983 .

[34]  Roger B. Myerson,et al.  Optimal Auction Design , 1981, Math. Oper. Res..

[35]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Supply-limiting mechanisms , 2012, EC '12.

[36]  S. Matthew Weinberg,et al.  Prophet Inequalities with Limited Information , 2013, SODA.

[37]  Vasilis Syrgkanis,et al.  Vickrey Auctions for Irregular Distributions , 2013, WINE.

[38]  Bart de Keijzer,et al.  Approximately Efficient Double Auctions with Strong Budget Balance , 2016, SODA.

[39]  Steven R. Williams,et al.  The Rate of Convergence to Efficiency in the Buyer's Bid Double Auction as the Market Becomes Large , 1989 .

[40]  Shahar Dobzinski,et al.  (Almost) Efficient Mechanisms for Bilateral Trading , 2016, ArXiv.

[41]  S. Matthew Weinberg,et al.  Optimal and Efficient Parametric Auctions , 2013, SODA.

[42]  Steven R. Williams,et al.  The Optimality of a Simple Market Mechanism , 2002 .

[43]  Michal Feldman,et al.  99% Revenue via Enhanced Competition , 2018, EC.

[44]  Vasilis Syrgkanis A Sample Complexity Measure with Applications to Learning Optimal Auctions , 2017, NIPS.

[45]  Yang Cai,et al.  Learning Multi-Item Auctions with (or without) Samples , 2017, 2017 IEEE 58th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS).

[46]  R. Vohra,et al.  Market Research and Market Design , 2003 .

[47]  Richard Cole,et al.  The sample complexity of revenue maximization , 2014, STOC.

[48]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Learning Simple Auctions , 2016, COLT.

[49]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Approximately Efficient Two-Sided Combinatorial Auctions , 2016, EC.

[50]  Noga Alon,et al.  Submultiplicative Glivenko-Cantelli and Uniform Convergence of Revenues , 2017, NIPS.

[51]  S. Matthew Weinberg,et al.  Optimal (and benchmark-optimal) competition complexity for additive buyers over independent items , 2018, STOC.

[52]  Jason D. Hartline Mechanism Design and Approximation , 2014 .

[53]  Steven R. Williams,et al.  Convergence to Efficiency in a Simple Market with Incomplete Information , 1994 .