Partial-revelation VCG mechanism for combinatorial auctions

Winner determination in combinatorial auctions has received significant interest in the AI Community in the last 3 years. Another difficult problem in combinatorial auctions is that of eliciting the bidders' preferences. We introduce a progressive, partial-revelation mechanism that determines an efficient allocation and the Vickrey payments. The mechanism is based on a family of algorithms that explore the natural lattice structure of the bidders' combined preferences. The mechanism elicits utilities in a natural sequence, and aims at keeping the amount of elicited information and the effort to compute the information minimal. We present analytical results on the amount of elicitation. We show that no value-querying algorithm that is constrained to querying feasible bundles can save more elicitation than one of our algorithms. We also show that one of our algorithms can determine the Vickrey payments as a costless by-product of determining an optimal allocation.

[1]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Preference elicitation in combinatorial auctions , 2002, EC '01.

[2]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Effectiveness of Preference Elicitation in Combinatorial Auctions , 2002, AMEC.

[3]  F. Ygge Optimal Auction Design for Agents with Hard Valuation Problems , .

[4]  Subhash Suri,et al.  Improved Algorithms for Optimal Winner Determination in Combinatorial Auctions and Generalizations , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[5]  Craig Boutilier,et al.  Bidding Languages for Combinatorial Auctions , 2001, IJCAI.

[6]  T. Sandholm,et al.  Preference Elicitation in Combinatorial Auctions (Extended Abstract) , 2001 .

[7]  David C. Parkes,et al.  Iterative Combinatorial Auctions: Theory and Practice , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[8]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  An algorithm for optimal winner determination in combinatorial auctions , 1999, IJCAI 1999.

[9]  Noam Nisan The Communication Complexity of Approximate Set Packing and Covering , 2002, ICALP.

[10]  Sven de Vries,et al.  Linear Programming and Vickrey Auctions , 2001 .

[11]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Issues in Computational Vickrey Auctions , 2000, Int. J. Electron. Commer..

[12]  Arne Andersson,et al.  Integer programming for combinatorial auction winner determination , 2000, Proceedings Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems.

[13]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Algorithm for optimal winner determination in combinatorial auctions , 2002, Artif. Intell..

[14]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Bidding and allocation in combinatorial auctions , 2000, EC '00.

[15]  David Levine,et al.  CABOB: A Fast Optimal Algorithm for Combinatorial Auctions , 2001, IJCAI.

[16]  T. Sandholm,et al.  Costly valuation computation in auctions , 2001 .

[17]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Taming the Computational Complexity of Combinatorial Auctions: Optimal and Approximate Approaches , 1999, IJCAI.

[18]  David C. Parkes,et al.  Preventing Strategic Manipulation in Iterative Auctions: Proxy Agents and Price-Adjustment , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[19]  Michael P. Wellman,et al.  AkBA: a progressive, anonymous-price combinatorial auction , 2000, EC '00.

[20]  David C. Parkes,et al.  Optimal Auction Design for Agents with Hard Valuation Problems , 1999, Agent Mediated Electronic Commerce.

[21]  Sushil Bikhchandani,et al.  The Package Assignment Model , 2002, J. Econ. Theory.

[22]  Ronald M. Harstad,et al.  Computationally Manageable Combinational Auctions , 1998 .

[23]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  An Implementation of the Contract Net Protocol Based on Marginal Cost Calculations , 1993, AAAI.

[24]  Richard E. Korf,et al.  Performance of Linear-Space Search Algorithms , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[25]  N. Nisan,et al.  The Communication Complexity of Efficient Allocation Problems , 2002 .

[26]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  eMediator: A Next Generation Electronic Commerce Server , 1999, AGENTS '00.