Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/2229012.2229016acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesecConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Combinatorial auctions with restricted complements

Published: 04 June 2012 Publication History

Abstract

Complements between goods--where one good takes on added value in the presence of another--have been a thorn in the side of algorithmic mechanism designers. On the one hand, complements are common in the standard motivating applications for combinatorial auctions, like spectrum license auctions. On the other, welfare maximization in the presence of complements is notoriously difficult, and this intractability has stymied theoretical progress in the area. For example, there are no known positive results for combinatorial auctions in which bidder valuations are multi-parameter and non-complement-free, other than the relatively weak results known for general valuations.
To make inroads on the problem of combinatorial auction design in the presence of complements, we propose a model for valuations with complements that is parameterized by the "size" of the complements. The model permits a succinct representation, a variety of computationally efficient queries, and non-trivial welfare-maximization algorithms and mechanisms. Specifically, a hypergraph-r valuation v for a good set M is represented by a hypergraph H = (M,E), where every (hyper-)edge e -- E contains at most r vertices and has a nonnegative weight we. Each good j -- M also has a nonnegative weight wj. The value v(S) for a subset SM of goods is defined as the sum of the weights of the goods and edges entirely contained in S.
We design the following polynomial-time approximation algorithms and truthful mechanisms for welfare maximization with bidders with hypergraph valuations. (1) For bidders whose valuations correspond to subgraphs of a known graph that is planar (or more generally, excludes a fixed minor), we give a truthful and (1 + ∈)-approximate mechanism. (2) We give a polynomial-time, r-approximation algorithm for welfare maximization with hypergraph-r valuations. Our algorithm randomly rounds a compact linear programming relaxation of the problem. (3) We design a different approximation algorithm and use it to give a polynomial-time, truthful-inexpectation mechanism that has an approximation factor of O(logr m).

References

[1]
Baker, B. S. 1994. Approximation algorithms fornp-complete problems on planar graphs. J. ACM 41, 1, 153--180.
[2]
Blumrosen, L. and Nisan, N.2005. On the computational power of iterative auctions. In ACM EC. 29--43.
[3]
Blumrosen, L. and Nisan, N.2007. In Algorithmic Game Theory (Noam Nisan,Tim Roughgarden, Eva Tardos and Vijay Vazirani(Editors)). Combinatorial Auctions (a survey). CambridgeUniversity Press.
[4]
Bodlaender, H. L. 1996. A linear-time algorithm forfinding tree-decompositions of small treewidth. SIAMJ. Comput., 1305--1317.
[5]
Brunner, C., Goeree, J. K., Holt, C. A., and Ledyard, J. O.2010. An experimental test of flexible combinatorialspectrum auction formats. American Economic Journal:Microeconomics 2, 1, 39--57.
[6]
Calinescu, G., Karloff, H. J., and Rabani, Y. 2000. Animproved approximation algorithm for multiway cut. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 60, 3, 564--574.
[7]
Carr, R. and Vempala, S. 2002. Randomized metarounding. RandomStruct. Algorithms 20, 343--352.
[8]
Chevaleyre, Y., Endriss, U., Estivie, S., and Maudet, N. 2008. Multiagent resource allocation in k-additive domains:Preference representation and complexity. Annals ofOperations Research 163, 1, 49--62.
[9]
Conitzer, V., Sandholm, T., and Santi, P. 2005. Combinatorial auctions with k-wise dependent valuations. In AAAI. 248--254.
[10]
Cramton, P., Shoham, Y., and Steinberg, R. 2006. Combinatorial Auctions. MIT Press.
[11]
DeVos, M., Ding, G., Oporowski, B., Sanders,D. P., Reed, B., Seymour, P., and Vertigan,D. 2004. Excluding any graph as a minor allows a lowtree-width 2-coloring. Journal of CombinatorialTheory, Series B 91, 1, 25 -- 41.
[12]
Dobzinski, S. and Dughmi, S.2009. On the power of randomization in algorithmicmechanism design. In FOCS. 505--514.
[13]
Dobzinski, S., Fu, H., and Kleinberg, R. 2010. Truthfulness via proxies. CoRR abs/1011.3232.
[14]
Dughmi, S., Roughgarden, T., and Yan, Q. 2011. From convex optimization torandomized mechanisms: toward optimal combinatorial auctions. In STOC. 149--158.
[15]
Feige,U. 2009. On maximizing welfare when utility functions aresubadditive. SIAM J. Comput. 39, 122--142.
[16]
Fleischer, L. 2000. Recent progress in submodularfunction minimization. Mathematical Programming SocietyNewsletter, OPTIMA64.
[17]
Kagel, J., Lien, Y., and Milgrom, P. 2010. Ascending prices and packagebidding: A theoretical and experimental analysis. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 2, 3, 160--85.
[18]
Kleinberg, J. M. and Tardos,É. 2002. Approximation algorithms for classificationproblems with pairwise relationships: metric labeling and markovrandom fields. J. ACM 49, 5, 616--639.
[19]
Krauthgamer,R. and Roughgarden, T. 2011. Metric clusteringvia consistent labeling. Theory of Computing 7, 1, 49--74.
[20]
Langberg, M., Rabani, Y., and Swamy, C. 2006. Approximation algorithmsfor graph homomorphism problems. In APPROX-RANDOM. 176--187.
[21]
Lavi, R. and Swamy, C. 2005. Truthful and near-optimal mechanism design via linearprogramming. In FOCS. 595--604.
[22]
Lehmann, D. J., O'Callaghan, L., and Shoham, Y. 2002. Truthrevelation in approximately efficient combinatorial auctions. J. ACM 49, 5, 577--602.
[23]
Milgrom, P. 2004. Putting Auction Theory toWork. Cambridge University Press.
[24]
Nisan, N. and Ronen, A. 2001. Algorithmic Mechanism Design. Games andEconomic Behavior 35, 1--2, 166--196.
[25]
Nisan, N. and Ronen, A. 2007. Computationally feasible VCG mechanisms. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 29, 19--47.
[26]
Robertson, N. and Seymour, P.2004. Graph minors. xx. wagner's conjecture. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 92, 2, 325--357. Special Issue Dedicated to Professor W.T. Tutte.
[27]
Sandholm, T. 2002. Algorithm for optimal winnerdetermination in combinatorial auctions. ArtificialIntelligence 135, 1--2, 1 -- 54.
[28]
Trevisan, L. 2001. Non-approximability results foroptimization problems on bounded degree instances. In STOC. 453--461.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Online Job AssignmentSSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.4745629Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)Bridging Incentives and Dependencies: An Iterative Combinatorial Auction Approach to Dependency-Aware Offloading in Mobile Edge ComputingIEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing10.1109/TMC.2024.340795823:12(12113-12130)Online publication date: Dec-2024
  • (2023)Future exposure modelling for risk-informed decision making in urban planningInternational Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.10365190(103651)Online publication date: May-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
EC '12: Proceedings of the 13th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce
June 2012
1016 pages
ISBN:9781450314152
DOI:10.1145/2229012
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 04 June 2012

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. combinatorial auctions
  2. hypergraph valuations
  3. mechanism design

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

EC '12
Sponsor:
EC '12: ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce
June 4 - 8, 2012
Valencia, Spain

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 664 of 2,389 submissions, 28%

Upcoming Conference

EC '25
The 25th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation
July 7 - 11, 2025
Stanford , CA , USA

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)7
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 28 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Online Job AssignmentSSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.4745629Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)Bridging Incentives and Dependencies: An Iterative Combinatorial Auction Approach to Dependency-Aware Offloading in Mobile Edge ComputingIEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing10.1109/TMC.2024.340795823:12(12113-12130)Online publication date: Dec-2024
  • (2023)Future exposure modelling for risk-informed decision making in urban planningInternational Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.10365190(103651)Online publication date: May-2023
  • (2021)Improved truthful mechanisms for subadditive combinatorial auctionsProceedings of the Thirty-Second Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms10.5555/3458064.3458104(653-661)Online publication date: 10-Jan-2021
  • (2020)Improved truthful mechanisms for combinatorial auctions with submodular biddersACM SIGecom Exchanges10.1145/3440959.344096418:1(19-27)Online publication date: 2-Dec-2020
  • (2019)Settling the Communication Complexity of Combinatorial Auctions with Two Subadditive Buyers2019 IEEE 60th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS)10.1109/FOCS.2019.00025(249-272)Online publication date: Dec-2019
  • (2019)Improved Truthful Mechanisms for Combinatorial Auctions with Submodular Bidders2019 IEEE 60th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS)10.1109/FOCS.2019.00024(233-248)Online publication date: Dec-2019
  • (2018)Efficient Auctions with Identity-Dependent Negative ExternalitiesProceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3237383.3238104(2156-2158)Online publication date: 9-Jul-2018
  • (2018)Pricing Equilibria and Graphical ValuationsACM Transactions on Economics and Computation10.1145/31754956:1(1-26)Online publication date: 5-Feb-2018
  • (2017)Coping with Hardness of Welfare Maximization by Introducing Useful Complexity MeasuresProceedings of the 16th Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3091125.3091461(1838-1839)Online publication date: 8-May-2017
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media