Allocating Indivisible Objects With a Parallel Method Insensitive to Identities

Sequential allocation is a decentralized mechanism for allocating indivisible objects to agents, in which agents sequentially pick their favorite objects among the remainder based on a pre-defined priority ordering of agents (a sequence). The problem of choosing the “best” sequence of agents to achieve the optimal social welfare has been investigated and conjectured to be NP-hard. We propose a simple parallel allocation protocol that is insensitive to agents’ identities. In every round of the parallel allocation process, every agent asks for an object among those that remain, and every reported object will be allocated randomly to an agent reporting it. Supposing additive utilities and independence between the agents, we compare the average (and worst-case) social welfare achieved by a parallel protocol and a sequential protocol. Theoretical and empirical results show that parallel protocol outperforms a sequential protocol (even when the best sequence of agents is applied). We also show that under the parallel mechanism, some manipulation problems (e.g., finding a successful strategy for a target set and finding an optimal strategy under some scoring function) can be solved in polynomial time.

[1]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Strategic Behavior in a Decentralized Protocol for Allocating Indivisible Good , 2012 .

[2]  Yevgeniy Vorobeychik,et al.  Equilibrium Analysis of Multi-Defender Security Games , 2015, IJCAI.

[3]  Jérôme Lang,et al.  Manipulating picking sequences , 2014, ECAI.

[4]  Ariel D. Procaccia,et al.  Truth, justice, and cake cutting , 2010, Games Econ. Behav..

[5]  Toby Walsh,et al.  A Social Welfare Optimal Sequential Allocation Procedure , 2013, IJCAI.

[6]  Ulrich Endriss,et al.  Fair Division under Ordinal Preferences: Computing Envy-Free Allocations of Indivisible Goods , 2010, ECAI.

[7]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Combinatorial Auctions , 2005, Encyclopedia of Wireless Networks.

[8]  Péter Biró,et al.  A new solution concept for the roommate problem: Q-stable matchings , 2016, Math. Soc. Sci..

[9]  Eric Budish,et al.  The Multi-Unit Assignment Problem: Theory and Evidence from Course Allocation at Harvard , 2010 .

[10]  Yevgeniy Vorobeychik,et al.  Average-case analysis of VCG with approximate resource allocation algorithms , 2011, Decis. Support Syst..

[11]  Makoto Yokoo,et al.  Manipulations in Two-Agent Sequential Allocation with Random Sequences , 2016, AAMAS.

[12]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Strategic Behavior when Allocating Indivisible Goods Sequentially , 2013, AAAI.

[13]  Yann Chevaleyre,et al.  Simple negotiation schemes for agents with simple preferences: sufficiency, necessity and maximality , 2010, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[14]  Yevgeniy Vorobeychik,et al.  Multidefender Security Games , 2015, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[15]  Steven J. Brams,et al.  The undercut procedure: an algorithm for the envy-free division of indivisible items , 2009, Soc. Choice Welf..

[16]  Yevgeniy Vorobeychik,et al.  Mechanism Design for Team Formation , 2015, AAAI.

[17]  Ajith Abraham,et al.  A tractable multiple agents protocol and algorithm for resource allocation under price rigidities , 2015, Applied Intelligence.

[18]  Toby Walsh,et al.  Two desirable fairness concepts for allocation of indivisible objects under ordinal preferences , 2016, SECO.

[19]  Jérôme Lang,et al.  A General Elicitation-Free Protocol for Allocating Indivisible Goods , 2011, IJCAI.

[20]  Simina Brânzei,et al.  Externalities in Cake Cutting , 2013, IJCAI.