Average-Case Analysis of Mechanism Design with Approximate Resource Allocation Algorithms

Mechanism design provides a useful practical paradigm for competitive resource allocation when agent preferences are uncertain. Vickrey-Clarke-Groves (VCG) mechanism offers a general technique for resource allocation with payments, ensuring allocative efficiency while eliciting truthful information about preferences. However, VCG relies on exact computation of optimal allocation of resources, a problem which is often computationally intractable. Using approximate allocation algorithms in place of exact algorithms gives rise to a VCG-based mechanism, which, unfortunately, no longer guarantees truthful revelation of preferences. Our main result is an average-case bound, which uses information about average, rather than worst-case, performance of an algorithm. We show how to combine the resulting bound with simulations to obtain probabilistic confidence bounds on agent incentives to misreport their preferences and illustrate the technique using combinatorial auction data. One important consequence of our analysis is an argument that using state-of-the-art algorithms for solving combinatorial allocation problems essentially eliminates agent incentives to misreport their preferences.

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

[2]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Truthful approximation mechanisms for restricted combinatorial auctions , 2008, Games Econ. Behav..

[3]  David C. Parkes,et al.  Hard-to-Manipulate Combinatorial Auctions , 2004 .

[4]  Lillian Lee,et al.  Fast context-free grammar parsing requires fast boolean matrix multiplication , 2001, JACM.

[5]  S. Raghavan,et al.  Fair Payments for Efficient Allocations in Public Sector Combinatorial Auctions , 2007, Manag. Sci..

[6]  E. S. Pearson,et al.  THE USE OF CONFIDENCE OR FIDUCIAL LIMITS ILLUSTRATED IN THE CASE OF THE BINOMIAL , 1934 .

[7]  Peter Cramton,et al.  The Quadratic Core-Selecting Payment Rule for Combinatorial Auctions , 2008 .

[8]  David Levine,et al.  CABOB: A Fast Optimal Algorithm for Winner Determination in Combinatorial Auctions , 2005, Manag. Sci..

[9]  Daniel Lehmann,et al.  Linear Programming helps solving large multi-unit combinatorial auctions , 2002, ArXiv.

[10]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Computationally feasible VCG mechanisms , 2000, EC '00.

[11]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  A Test Suite for Combinatorial Auctions , 2005 .

[12]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Truthful approximation mechanisms for restricted combinatorial auctions: extended abstract , 2002, AAAI 2002.

[13]  Ilya Segal,et al.  Solutions manual for Microeconomic theory : Mas-Colell, Whinston and Green , 1997 .

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

[15]  D. Lehmann,et al.  The Winner Determination Problem , 2003 .

[16]  Chaitanya Swamy,et al.  Truthful and Near-Optimal Mechanism Design via Linear Programming , 2005, FOCS.

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

[18]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Truthful randomized mechanisms for combinatorial auctions , 2006, STOC '06.