Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

Earning and Utility Limits in Fisher Markets

Published: 18 July 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Earning limits and utility limits are novel aspects in the classic Fisher market model. Sellers with earning limits have bounds on their income and lower the supply they bring to the market if income exceeds the limit. Buyers with utility limits have an upper bound on the amount of utility that they want to derive and lower the budget they bring to the market if utility exceeds the limit. Markets with these properties can have multiple equilibria with different characteristics.
We analyze earning limits and utility limits in markets with linear and spending-constraint utilities. For markets with earning limits and spending-constraint utilities, we show that equilibrium price vectors form a lattice and the spending of buyers is unique in non-degenerate markets. We provide a scaling-based algorithm to compute an equilibrium in time O(n3ℓ log (ℓ + nU)), where n is the number of agents, ℓ ≥ n a bound on the segments in the utility functions, and U the largest integer in the market representation. We show how to refine any equilibrium in polynomial time to one with minimal prices or one with maximal prices (if it exists). Moreover, our algorithm can be used to obtain in polynomial time a 2-approximation for maximizing Nash social welfare in multi-unit markets with indivisible items that come in multiple copies.
For markets with utility limits and linear utilities, we show similar results—lattice structure of price vectors, uniqueness of allocation in non-degenerate markets, and polynomial-time refinement procedures to obtain equilibria with minimal and maximal prices. We complement these positive results with hardness results for related computational questions. We prove that it is NP-hard to compute a market equilibrium that maximizes social welfare, and it is PPAD-hard to find any market equilibrium with utility functions with separate satiation points for each buyer and each good.

References

[1]
Nima Anari, Tung Mai, Shayan Oveis Gharan, and Vijay Vazirani. 2018. Nash social welfare for indivisible items under separable, piecewise-linear concave utilities. In Proceedings of the 29th Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA’18). 2274--2290.
[2]
Nir Andelman and Yishay Mansour. 2004. Auctions with budget constraints. In Proceedings of the 9th Scandinavian Workshop Algorithm Theory (SWAT’04). 26--38.
[3]
Kenneth Arrow and Gerard Debreu. 1954. Existence of an equilibrium for a competitive economy. Econometrica 22, 3 (1954), 265--290.
[4]
Yossi Azar, Benjamin Birnbaum, Anna Karlin, Claire Mathieu, and C. Thach Nguyen. 2008. Improved approximation algorithms for budgeted allocations. In Proceedings of the 35th International Colloquim on Automata, Languages 8 Programming (ICALP’08), Vol. 1. 186--197.
[5]
Xiaohui Bei, Jugal Garg, and Martin Hoefer. 2019. Ascending-price algorithms for unknown markets. ACM Trans. Algor. 15, 3 (2019), 37.
[6]
Xiaohui Bei, Jugal Garg, Martin Hoefer, and Kurt Mehlhorn. 2016. Computing equilibria in markets with budget-additive utilities. In Proceedings of the 24th European Symposium on Algorithms (ESA’16). 8:1--8:14.
[7]
Xiaohui Bei, Jugal Garg, Martin Hoefer, and Kurt Mehlhorn. 2017. Earning limits in Fisher markets with spending-constraint utilities. In Proceedings of the 10th Symposium on Algorithmic Game Theory (SAGT’17). 67--79.
[8]
Benjamin Birnbaum, Nikhil Devanur, and Lin Xiao. 2011. Distributed algorithms via gradient descent for Fisher markets. In Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC’11). 127--136.
[9]
Niv Buchbinder, Kamal Jain, and Joseph Naor. 2007. Online primal-dual algorithms for maximizing ad-auctions revenue. In Proceedings of the 15th European Symposium on Algorithms (ESA’07). 253--264.
[10]
Dave Buchfuhrer, Shaddin Dughmi, Hu Fu, Robert Kleinberg, Elchanan Mossel, Christos Papadimitriou, Michael Schapira, Yaron Singer, and Chris Umans. 2010. Inapproximability for VCG-based combinatorial auctions. In Proceedings of the 21st Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA’10). 518--536.
[11]
Deeparnab Chakrabarty and Gagan Goel. 2010. On the approximability of budgeted allocations and improved lower bounds for submodular welfare maximization and GAP. SIAM J. Comput. 39, 6 (2010), 2189--2211.
[12]
Xi Chen and Shang-Hua Teng. 2009. Spending is not easier than trading: On the computational equivalence of Fisher and arrow-debreu equilibria. In Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation (ISAAC’09). 647--656.
[13]
Yun Kuen Cheung, Richard Cole, and Nikhil Devanur. 2013. Tatonnement beyond gross substitutes? Gradient descent to the rescue. In Proceedings of the 45th Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC’13). 191--200.
[14]
Bruno Codenotti and Kasturi Varadarajan. 2007. Computation of market equilibria by convex programming. See Reference {34}, Chapter 8.
[15]
Richard Cole, Nikhil Devanur, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Kamal Jain, Tung Mai, Vijay Vazirani, and Sadra Yazdanbod. 2017. Convex program duality, Fisher markets, and nash social welfare. In Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Economics and Computation (EC’17). 459--460.
[16]
Richard Cole and Lisa Fleischer. 2008. Fast-converging tatonnement algorithms for one-time and ongoing market problems. In Proceedings of the 40th Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC’08). 315--324.
[17]
Richard Cole and Vasilis Gkatzelis. 2018. Approximating the nash social welfare with indivisible items. SIAM J. Comput. 47, 3 (2018), 1211--1236.
[18]
Nikhil Devanur, Jugal Garg, Ruta Mehta, Vijay Vazirani, and Sadra Yazdanbod. 2018. A new class of combinatorial markets with covering constraints: Algorithms and applications. In Proceedings of the 29th Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA’18). 2311--2325.
[19]
Nikhil Devanur, Christos Papadimitriou, Amin Saberi, and Vijay Vazirani. 2008. Market equilibrium via a primal--dual algorithm for a convex program. J. ACM 55, 5 (2008), 22:1--22:18.
[20]
Nikhil Devanur and Vijay Vazirani. 2004. The spending constraint model for market equilibrium: Algorithmic, existence and uniqueness results. In Proceedings of the 36th Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC’04). 519--528.
[21]
Shahar Dobzinski, Michal Feldman, Inbal Talgam-Cohen, and Omri Weinstein. 2015. Welfare and revenue guarantees for competitive bundling equilibrium. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Web and Internet Economics (WINE’15). 300--313.
[22]
Ran Duan, Jugal Garg, and Kurt Mehlhorn. 2016. An improved combinatorial polynomial algorithm for the linear arrow-debreu market. In Proceedings of the 27th Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA’16). 90--106.
[23]
Ran Duan and Kurt Mehlhorn. 2015. A combinatorial polynomial algorithm for the linear arrow-debreu market. Inf. Comput. 243 (2015), 112--132.
[24]
Edmund Eisenberg and David Gale. 1959. Consensus of subjective probabilities: The Pari-Mutuel method. Ann. Math. Stat. 30, 1 (1959), 165--168.
[25]
Michal Feldman, Nick Gravin, and Brendan Lucier. 2016. Combinatorial Walrasian equilibrium. SIAM J. Comput. 45, 1 (2016), 29--48.
[26]
Jugal Garg, Martin Hoefer, and Kurt Mehlhorn. 2018. Approximating the Nash social welfare with budget-additive valuations. In Proceedings of the 29th Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA’18). 2326--2340.
[27]
Gagan Goel and Vijay Vazirani. 2011. A perfect price discrimination market model with production, and a rational convex program for it. Math. Oper. Res. 36, 4 (2011), 762--782.
[28]
Dorit Hochbaum and George Shanthikumar. 1990. Convex separable optimization is not much harder than linear optimization. J. ACM 37, 4 (1990), 843--862.
[29]
Sungjin Im, Janardhan Kulkarni, and Kamesh Munagala. 2018. Competitive algorithms from competitive equilibria: Non-clairvoyant scheduling under polyhedral constraints. J. ACM 65, 1 (2018), 3:1--3:33.
[30]
Kamal Jain. 2007. A polynomial time algorithm for computing the Arrow-Debreu market equilibrium for linear utilities. SIAM J. Comput. 37, 1 (2007), 306--318.
[31]
Kamal Jain and Vijay Vazirani. 2010. Eisenberg-Gale markets: Algorithms and game-theoretic properties. Games Econom. Behav. 70, 1 (2010), 84--106.
[32]
Michael Kapralov, Ian Post, and Jan Vondrák. 2013. Online submodular welfare maximization: Greedy is optimal. In Proceedings of the 24th Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA’13). 1216--1225.
[33]
Alexander Karzanov and Thomas McCormick. 1997. Polynomial methods for separable convex optimization in unimodular linear spaces with applications. SIAM J. Comput. 26, 4 (1997), 1245--1275.
[34]
Noam Nisan, Éva Tardos, Tim Roughgarden, and Vijay Vazirani (Eds.). 2007. Algorithmic Game Theory. Cambridge University Press.
[35]
James Orlin. 2010. Improved algorithms for computing Fisher’s market clearing prices. In Proceedings of the 42nd Symposium on the Theory of Comput. (STOC’10). 291--300.
[36]
Tim Roughgarden and Inbal Talgam-Cohen. 2015. Why prices need algorithms. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Economics and Computing (EC’15). 19--36.
[37]
Vadim Shmyrev. 2009. An algorithm for finding equilibrium in the linear exchange model with fixed budgets. J. Appl. Indust. Math. 3, 4 (2009), 505--518.
[38]
Vijay Vazirani. 2007. Combinatorial algorithms for market equilibria. See Reference {34}, Chapter 7.
[39]
Vijay Vazirani. 2010. Spending constraint utilities with applications to the adwords market. Math. Oper. Res. 35, 2 (2010), 458--478.
[40]
László Végh. 2014. Concave generalized flows with applications to market equilibria. Math. Oper. Res. 39, 2 (2014), 573--596.
[41]
László Végh. 2016. A strongly polynomial algorithm for a class of minimum-cost flow problems with separable convex objectives. SIAM J. Comput. 45, 5 (2016), 1729--1761.
[42]
Yinyu Ye. 2008. A path to the Arrow-Debreu competitive market equilibrium. Math. Prog. 111, 1--2 (2008), 315--348.
[43]
Li Zhang. 2011. Proportional response dynamics in the Fisher market. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 412, 24 (2011), 2691--2698.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)E-commerce Trading using VCG Auction Mechanism in Metaverse2024 2nd World Conference on Communication & Computing (WCONF)10.1109/WCONF61366.2024.10692297(1-5)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2024
  • (2023)Infinite-Dimensional Fisher Markets and Tractable Fair DivisionOperations Research10.1287/opre.2022.234471:2(688-707)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2023
  • (2020)Nash Social Welfare in Selfish and Online Load BalancingWeb and Internet Economics10.1007/978-3-030-64946-3_23(323-337)Online publication date: 7-Dec-2020

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation
ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation  Volume 7, Issue 2
May 2019
170 pages
ISSN:2167-8375
EISSN:2167-8383
DOI:10.1145/3340299
Issue’s Table of Contents
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 the author(s) 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].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 18 July 2019
Accepted: 01 May 2019
Received: 01 March 2018
Published in TEAC Volume 7, Issue 2

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Market equilibrium
  2. earning limits
  3. equilibrium computation
  4. spending-constraint utilities
  5. utility limits

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)127
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)7
Reflects downloads up to 04 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)E-commerce Trading using VCG Auction Mechanism in Metaverse2024 2nd World Conference on Communication & Computing (WCONF)10.1109/WCONF61366.2024.10692297(1-5)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2024
  • (2023)Infinite-Dimensional Fisher Markets and Tractable Fair DivisionOperations Research10.1287/opre.2022.234471:2(688-707)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2023
  • (2020)Nash Social Welfare in Selfish and Online Load BalancingWeb and Internet Economics10.1007/978-3-030-64946-3_23(323-337)Online publication date: 7-Dec-2020

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Get Access

Login options

Full Access

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media