Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Alternatives to truthfulness are hard to recognize

  • Published:
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The central question in mechanism design is how to implement a given social choice function. One of the most studied concepts is that of truthful implementations in which truth-telling is always the best response of the players. The Revelation Principle says that one can focus on truthful implementations without loss of generality (if there is no truthful implementation then there is no implementation at all). Green and Laffont (Rev Econ Stud 53:447–456, 1986) showed that, in the scenario in which players’ responses can be partially verified, the revelation principle holds only in some particular cases. When the Revelation Principle does not hold, non-truthful implementations become interesting since they might be the only way to implement a social choice function of interest. In this work we show that, although non-truthful implementations may exist, they are hard to find. Namely, it is NP-complete to decide if a given social choice function can be implemented in a non-truthful manner, or even if it can be implemented at all. This is in contrast to the fact that truthful implementability can be efficiently recognized, even when partial verification of the agents is allowed. Our results also show that there is no “simple” characterization of those social choice functions for which it is worth looking for non-truthful implementations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Aspvall B., Plass M. F., Tarjan R. E. (1979) A linear-time algorithm for testing the truth of certain quantified boolean formulas. Information Processing Letters 8(3): 121–123

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Bull J., Watson J. (2007) Hard evidence and mechanism design. Games and Economic Behavior 58(1): 75–93

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Conitzer, V., & Sandholm, T. (2002). Complexity of mechanism design. In UAI (pp. 103–110).

  4. Conitzer, V., & Sandholm, T. (2004). Computational criticisms of the revelation principle.In ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (pp. 262–263)

  5. Garey, M. R., & Johnson, D. S. (1979). Computers and intractability. Freeman.

  6. Green J. R., Laffont J.-J. (1986) Partially verifiable information and mechanism design. The Review of Economic Studies 53: 447–456

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Rochet J.-C. (1987) A condition for rationalizability in a quasi-linear context. Journal of Mathematical Economics 16: 191–200

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Singh N., Wittman D. (2001) Implementation with partial verification. Review of Economic Design 6(1): 63–84

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Strausz R. (2003) Deterministic mechanisms and the revelation principle. Economics Letters 79(3): 333–337

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Vohra, R. (2007). Paths, cycles and mechanism design. Technical report, Kellogg School of Management.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Informatica ed Applicazioni, Università di Salerno, Salerno, Italy

    Vincenzo Auletta, Paolo Penna & Giuseppe Persiano

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

    Carmine Ventre

Authors
  1. Vincenzo Auletta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paolo Penna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Giuseppe Persiano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carmine Ventre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carmine Ventre.

Additional information

A preliminary version of this paper is published in the Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Algorithmic Game Theory (Burkhard Monien, Ulf-Peter Schroeder (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4997 Springer 2008, pp. 194-205). Some of the results discussed in this paper have also been presented and included in the not formally published proceedings (only distributed as a bound volume) of the 2nd International Workshop on Computational Social Choice (COMSOC 2008).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Auletta, V., Penna, P., Persiano, G. et al. Alternatives to truthfulness are hard to recognize. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 22, 200–216 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-009-9119-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-009-9119-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation