Algorithms for Competitive Division of Chores

We study the problem of allocating divisible bads (chores) among multiple agents with additive utilities, when money transfers are not allowed. The competitive rule is known to be the best mechanism for goods with additive utilities and was recently extended to chores by Bogomolnaia et al (2017). For both goods and chores, the rule produces Pareto optimal and envy-free allocations. In the case of goods, the outcome of the competitive rule can be easily computed. Competitive allocations solve the Eisenberg-Gale convex program; hence the outcome is unique and can be approximately found by standard gradient methods. An exact algorithm that runs in polynomial time in the number of agents and goods was given by Orlin. In the case of chores, the competitive rule does not solve any convex optimization problem; instead, competitive allocations correspond to local minima, local maxima, and saddle points of the Nash Social Welfare on the Pareto frontier of the set of feasible utilities. The rule becomes multivalued and none of the standard methods can be applied to compute its outcome. In this paper, we show that all the outcomes of the competitive rule for chores can be computed in strongly polynomial time if either the number of agents or the number of chores is fixed. The approach is based on a combination of three ideas: all consumption graphs of Pareto optimal allocations can be listed in polynomial time; for a given consumption graph, a candidate for a competitive allocation can be constructed via explicit formula; and a given allocation can be checked for being competitive using a maximum flow computation as in Devanur et al (2002). Our algorithm immediately gives an approximately-fair allocation of indivisible chores by the rounding technique of Barman and Krishnamurthy (2018).

[1]  Steven Vajda,et al.  The Theory of Linear Economic Models , 1960 .

[2]  Michal Feldman,et al.  Combinatorial Walrasian Equilibrium , 2016, SIAM J. Comput..

[3]  Rob van Stee,et al.  Dividing Connected Chores Fairly , 2013, SAGT.

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

[5]  László A. Végh Strongly polynomial algorithm for a class of minimum-cost flow problems with separable convex objectives , 2011, STOC '12.

[6]  Nikhil R. Devanur,et al.  A New Class of Combinatorial Markets with Covering Constraints: Algorithms and Applications , 2015, SODA.

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

[8]  Kousha Etessami,et al.  On the Complexity of Nash Equilibria and Other Fixed Points , 2010, SIAM J. Comput..

[9]  Mohammad Taghi Hajiaghayi,et al.  Envy-free Chore Division for An Arbitrary Number of Agents , 2018, SODA.

[10]  Li Zhang,et al.  Proportional response dynamics in the Fisher market , 2009, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[11]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Algorithmic Game Theory , 2007 .

[12]  Vijay V. Vazirani,et al.  Eisenberg-Gale markets: algorithms and structural properties , 2007, STOC '07.

[13]  James B. Orlin,et al.  Improved algorithms for computing fisher's market clearing prices: computing fisher's market clearing prices , 2010, STOC '10.

[14]  Juan Sabia,et al.  On Sign Conditions Over Real Multivariate Polynomials , 2008, Discret. Comput. Geom..

[15]  K. Arrow,et al.  EXISTENCE OF AN EQUILIBRIUM FOR A COMPETITIVE ECONOMY , 1954 .

[16]  Léon Walras Éléments d'économie politique pure, ou, Théorie de la richesse sociale , 1976 .

[17]  Kamal Jain,et al.  A polynomial time algorithm for computing an Arrow-Debreu market equilibrium for linear utilities , 2004, 45th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[18]  Nikhil R. Devanur,et al.  Market equilibrium via a primal-dual-type algorithm , 2002, The 43rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2002. Proceedings..

[19]  Simina Brânzei,et al.  Universal Growth in Production Economies , 2018, NeurIPS.

[20]  Chiaki Hara Existence of Equilibria in Economies with Bads , 2005 .

[21]  Ruta Mehta,et al.  Settling the complexity of Leontief and PLC exchange markets under exact and approximate equilibria , 2017, STOC.

[22]  Vijay V. Vazirani,et al.  An Auction-Based Market Equilibrium Algorithm for the Separable Gross Substitutability Case , 2004, APPROX-RANDOM.

[23]  H. Varian Equity, Envy and Efficiency , 1974 .

[24]  Moshe Babaioff,et al.  Fair Allocation through Competitive Equilibrium from Generic Incomes , 2019, FAT.

[25]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Algorithms for Max-Min Share Fair Allocation of Indivisible Chores , 2017, AAAI.

[26]  Hervé Moulin,et al.  Competitive Division of a Mixed Manna , 2017, ArXiv.

[27]  Nikhil R. Devanur,et al.  Convex Program Duality, Fisher Markets, and Nash Social Welfare , 2016, EC.

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

[29]  Steven Gjerstad Multiple Equilibria in Exchange Economies with Homothetic, Nearly Identical Preferences , 1996 .

[30]  S. Basu,et al.  A New Algorithm to Find a Point in Every Cell Defined by a Family of Polynomials , 1998 .

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

[32]  Evangelos Markakis,et al.  Approximation Algorithms for Computing Maximin Share Allocations , 2015, ICALP.

[33]  H. Scarf,et al.  How to Compute Equilibrium Prices in 1891 , 2005 .

[34]  Frédéric Meunier,et al.  Envy-free divisions of a partially burnt cake , 2018, ArXiv.

[35]  Nikhil R. Devanur,et al.  Distributed algorithms via gradient descent for fisher markets , 2011, EC '11.

[36]  G. Ziegler Lectures on Polytopes , 1994 .

[37]  D. Gale The linear exchange model , 1976 .

[38]  Bo Li,et al.  Strategyproof and Approximately Maxmin Fair Share Allocation of Chores , 2019, IJCAI.

[39]  Nimrod Megiddo,et al.  Continuity Properties of Equilibrium Prices and Allocations in Linear Fisher Markets , 2007, WINE.

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

[41]  Vincent Conitzer,et al.  Fair Public Decision Making , 2016, EC.

[42]  László A. Végh Concave Generalized Flows with Applications to Market Equilibria , 2011, 2012 IEEE 53rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[43]  Erel Segal-Halevi,et al.  Fairly Dividing a Cake after Some Parts Were Burnt in the Oven , 2017, AAMAS.

[44]  David Gale The theory of linear economic models , 1960 .

[45]  Siddharth Barman,et al.  On the Proximity of Markets with Integral Equilibria , 2018, AAAI.

[46]  Simina Brânzei,et al.  To Give or Not to Give: Fair Division for Single Minded Valuations , 2016, IJCAI.

[47]  Bruno Codenotti,et al.  Market Equilibrium for CES Exchange Economies: Existence, Multiplicity, and Computation , 2005, FSTTCS.

[48]  Fang Wu,et al.  Proportional response dynamics leads to market equilibrium , 2007, STOC '07.

[49]  Ariel D. Procaccia,et al.  Spliddit: unleashing fair division algorithms , 2015, SECO.

[50]  Atila Abdulkadiroglu,et al.  School Choice: A Mechanism Design Approach , 2003 .

[51]  Mohab Safey El Din,et al.  Testing Sign Conditions on a Multivariate Polynomial and Applications , 2007, Math. Comput. Sci..

[52]  R. Zeckhauser,et al.  The Efficient Allocation of Individuals to Positions , 1979, Journal of Political Economy.

[53]  Sanjeev Arora,et al.  Computational Complexity: A Modern Approach , 2009 .

[54]  Erel Segal-Halevi,et al.  Fair Division with Minimal Sharing , 2019, ArXiv.

[55]  Shira Zerbib,et al.  Envy-free cake division without assuming the players prefer nonempty pieces , 2018, Israel Journal of Mathematics.

[56]  Nikhil R. Devanur,et al.  An Improved Approximation Scheme for Computing Arrow-Debreu Prices for the Linear Case , 2003, FSTTCS.

[57]  Nikhil R. Devanur,et al.  Tatonnement beyond gross substitutes?: gradient descent to the rescue , 2013, STOC '13.

[58]  Saeed Alaei,et al.  Computing Equilibrium in Matching Markets , 2017, EC.

[59]  Hervé Moulin,et al.  A New Solution to the Random Assignment Problem , 2001, J. Econ. Theory.

[60]  Elisha Peterson,et al.  Four-Person Envy-Free Chore Division , 2002 .

[61]  Vijay V. Vazirani,et al.  Market equilibria for homothetic, quasi-concave utilities and economies of scale in production , 2005, SODA '05.

[62]  B. Eaves A finite algorithm for the linear exchange model , 1976 .

[63]  Simina Brânzei,et al.  Characterization and Computation of Equilibria for Indivisible Goods , 2015, SAGT.

[64]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  On the Complexity of the Parity Argument and Other Inefficient Proofs of Existence , 1994, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[65]  Jung S. You Optimal VCG mechanisms to assign multiple bads , 2015, Games Econ. Behav..

[66]  Nikhil R. Devanur,et al.  Market Equilibria in Polynomial Time for Fixed Number of Goods or Agents , 2008, 2008 49th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[67]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  The complexity of fairness through equilibrium , 2014, EC.

[68]  Ioannis Caragiannis,et al.  Fair allocation of combinations of indivisible goods and chores , 2018, ArXiv.

[69]  L. Shapley,et al.  On cores and indivisibility , 1974 .

[70]  Ning Chen,et al.  Fisher Equilibrium Price with a Class of Concave Utility Functions , 2004, ESA.