Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3391403.3399454acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesecConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Optimal Mechanism Design for Single-Minded Agents

Published: 13 July 2020 Publication History

Abstract

We consider optimal (revenue maximizing) mechanism design in the interdimensional setting, where one dimension is the 'value' of the buyer, and the other is a 'type' that captures some auxiliary information. A prototypical example of this is the FedEx Problem, for which Fiat et al. [2016] characterize the optimal mechanism for a single agent. Another example of this is when the type encodes the buyer's budget [DW17]. The question we address is how far can such characterizations goIn particular, we consider the setting of single-minded agents. A seller has heterogenous items. A buyer has a valuation vfor a specific subset of items S, and obtains value vif and only if he gets all the items in S(and potentially some others too).
We show the following results. Deterministic mechanisms (i.e. posted prices) are optimal for distributions that satisfy the "declining marginal revenue" (DMR) property. In this case we give an explicit construction of the optimal mechanism. Without the DMR assumption, the result depends on the structure of the minimal directed acyclic graph (DAG) representing the partial order among types. When the DAG has out-degree at most 1, we characterize the optimal mechanism àla FedEx; this can be thought of as a generalization of the FedEx characterization since FedEx corresponds to a DAG that is a line. Surprisingly, without the DMR assumption andwhen the DAG has at least one node with an out-degree of at least 2, then we show that there is no hope of such a characterization. The minimal such example happens on a DAG with 3 types. We show that in this case the menu complexity is unboundedin that for any M, there exist distributions over (v,S) pairs such that the menu complexity of the optimal mechanism is at least M. For the case of 3 types, we also show that for all distributions there exists an optimal mechanism of finitemenu complexity. This is in contrast to the case where you have 2 heterogenous items with additive utilities for which the menu complexity could be uncountably infinite [DDT15, MV07].
In addition, we prove that optimal mechanisms for Multi-Unit Pricing (without a DMR assumption) can have unbounded menu complexity as well, and we further propose an extension where the menu complexity of optimal mechanisms can be countably infinite, but not uncountably infinite. Taken together, these results establish that optimal mechanisms in interdimensional settings are both surprisingly richer than single-dimensional settings, yet also vastly more structured than multi-dimensional settings.

References

[1]
Moshe Babaioff, Yannai A. Gonczarowski, and Noam Nisan. 2017. The Menu-size Complexity of Revenue Approximation. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2017). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 869--877. https://doi.org/10.1145/3055399.3055426
[2]
Patrick Briest, Shuchi Chawla, Robert Kleinberg, and S Matthew Weinberg. 2015. Pricing lotteries. Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 156 (2015), 144--174.
[3]
Yang Cai, Constantinos Daskalakis, and S Matthew Weinberg. 2012. An algorithmic characterization of multi-dimensional mechanisms. In Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing. 459--478.
[4]
Yang Cai, Nikhil R. Devanur, and S. Matthew Weinberg. 2016. A Duality Based Unified Approach to Bayesian Mechanism Design. In Proceedings of the Forty-eighth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 926--939. https://doi.org/10.1145/2897518.2897645
[5]
Yeon-Koo Che and Ian Gale. 2000. The Optimal Mechanism for Selling to a Budget-Constrained Buyer. Journal of Economic theory, Vol. 92, 2 (2000), 198--233.
[6]
Constantinos Daskalakis, Alan Deckelbaum, and Christos Tzamos. 2013. Mechanism design via optimal transport. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC '13). 269--286. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2482540.2482593
[7]
Constantinos Daskalakis, Alan Deckelbaum, and Christos Tzamos. 2015. Strong duality for a multiple-good monopolist. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation. ACM, 449--450.
[8]
Nikhil R. Devanur, Nima Haghpanah, and Christos-Alexandros Psomas. 2017. Optimal Multi-Unit Mechanisms with Private Demands. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 41--42. https://doi.org/10.1145/3033274.3085122
[9]
Nikhil R. Devanur and S. Matthew Weinberg. 2017. The Optimal Mechanism for Selling to a Budget Constrained Buyer: The General Case. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 39--40. https://doi.org/10.1145/3033274.3085132
[10]
Amos Fiat, Kira Goldner, Anna R. Karlin, and Elias Koutsoupias. 2016. The FedEx Problem. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 21--22. https://doi.org/10.1145/2940716.2940752
[11]
Yiannis Giannakopoulos and Elias Koutsoupias. 2014. Duality and Optimality of Auctions for Uniform Distributions. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC '14). 259--276. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2600057.2602883
[12]
Yannai A. Gonczarowski. 2018. Bounding the menu-size of approximately optimal auctions via optimal-transport duality. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2018, Los Angeles, CA, USA, June 25--29, 2018. 123--131. https://doi.org/10.1145/3188745.3188786
[13]
Nima Haghpanah and Jason Hartline. 2015. Reverse mechanism design. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation. ACM, 757--758. Updated version: http://arxiv.org/abs/1404.1341.
[14]
Sergiu Hart and Noam Nisan. 2013. The Menu-size Complexity of Auctions. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 565--566. https://doi.org/10.1145/2482540.2482544
[15]
Sergiu Hart and Philip J Reny. 2012. Maximizing revenue with multiple goods: Nonmonotonicity and other observations. Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Center for Rationality DP-630 (2012).
[16]
Jason D Hartline. 2013. Mechanism design and approximation. Book draft. October, Vol. 122 (2013).
[17]
Jean-Jacques Laffont, Eric Maskin, and Jean-Charles Rochet. 1987. Optimal nonlinear pricing with two-dimensional characteristics. Information, Incentives and Economic Mechanisms (1987), 256--266.
[18]
Daniel Lehmann, Liadan Ita O'Callaghan, and Yoav Shoham. 2002. Truth Revelation in Approximately Efficient Combinatorial Auctions. J. ACM, Vol. 49, 5 (Sept. 2002), 577--602. https://doi.org/10.1145/585265.585266
[19]
Alexey Malakhov and Rakesh V Vohra. 2009. An optimal auction for capacity constrained bidders: a network perspective. Economic Theory, Vol. 39, 1 (2009), 113--128.
[20]
Alejandro M. Manelli and Daniel R. Vincent. 2007. Multidimensional mechanism design: Revenue maximization and the multiple-good monopoly. Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 137, 1 (2007), 153 -- 185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jet.2006.12.007
[21]
R. Preston McAfee and John McMillan. 1988. Multidimensional incentive compatibility and mechanism design. Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 46, 2 (1988), 335 -- 354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-0531(88)90135--4
[22]
Roger B. Myerson. 1981. Optimal Auction Design. Mathematics of Operations Research, Vol. 6, 1 (1981), 58--73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/moor.6.1.58
[23]
Raghuvansh R. Saxena, Ariel Schvartzman, and S. Matthew Weinberg. 2018. The Menu-Complexity of One-and-a-Half Dimensional Mechanism Design. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA '18).
[24]
Zihe Wang and Pingzhong Tang. 2014. Optimal Mechanisms with Simple Menus. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 227--240. https://doi.org/10.1145/2600057.2602863

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Countering Value Uncertainty via Refunds: A Mechanism Design ApproachSSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.4561235Online publication date: 2023
  • (2023)Coordinating Monetary Contributions in Participatory BudgetingAlgorithmic Game Theory10.1007/978-3-031-43254-5_9(142-160)Online publication date: 4-Sep-2023
  • (2022)Simple mechanisms for welfare maximization in rich advertising auctionsProceedings of the 36th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems10.5555/3600270.3602320(28280-28292)Online publication date: 28-Nov-2022
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
EC '20: Proceedings of the 21st ACM Conference on Economics and Computation
July 2020
937 pages
ISBN:9781450379755
DOI:10.1145/3391403
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].

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 13 July 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. duality
  2. interdimensional
  3. menu complexity
  4. optimal mechanism design
  5. partial lagrangian
  6. revenue
  7. single-minded valuations

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

EC '20
Sponsor:
EC '20: The 21st ACM Conference on Economics and Computation
July 13 - 17, 2020
Virtual Event, Hungary

Acceptance Rates

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

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)20
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
Reflects downloads up to 30 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Countering Value Uncertainty via Refunds: A Mechanism Design ApproachSSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.4561235Online publication date: 2023
  • (2023)Coordinating Monetary Contributions in Participatory BudgetingAlgorithmic Game Theory10.1007/978-3-031-43254-5_9(142-160)Online publication date: 4-Sep-2023
  • (2022)Simple mechanisms for welfare maximization in rich advertising auctionsProceedings of the 36th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems10.5555/3600270.3602320(28280-28292)Online publication date: 28-Nov-2022
  • (2022)Pricing ordered itemsProceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing10.1145/3519935.3520065(722-735)Online publication date: 9-Jun-2022
  • (2022)Optimal Multi-Dimensional Mechanisms are not Locally-ImplementableProceedings of the 23rd ACM Conference on Economics and Computation10.1145/3490486.3538334(875-896)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2022
  • (2022)Buy-many mechanisms are not much better than item pricingGames and Economic Behavior10.1016/j.geb.2022.04.003134(104-116)Online publication date: Jul-2022
  • (2022)The menu-size complexity of revenue approximationGames and Economic Behavior10.1016/j.geb.2021.03.001134(281-307)Online publication date: Jul-2022

View Options

Get Access

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