Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2310.08881

Beyond Worst-Case Online Allocation via Dynamic Max-min Fairness

Abstract

We study the allocation of shared resources over multiple rounds among competing agents, via the dynamic max-min fair (DMMF) mechanism: the good in each round is allocated to the requesting agent with the least number of allocations received to date. We show that in large markets when an agent has i.i.d. values across rounds, under mild distributional assumptions (e.g., bounded PDF function), the DMMF mechanism allows each agent to realize a $1 - o(1)$ fraction of her ideal utility -- her highest achievable utility given her nominal share of resources. This guarantee holds under arbitrary behavior by other agents and is achieved by characterizing the agent's utility under a rich space of strategies, wherein an agent can tune how aggressive to be in requesting the item. Our techniques also allow us to handle settings where an agent's values are correlated across rounds, thereby allowing an adversary to predict and block her future values. By tuning the aggressiveness, an agent can guarantee $Ω(γ)$ fraction of her ideal utility, where $γ\in [0, 1]$ is a parameter that quantifies dependence across rounds (with $γ= 1$ indicating full independence and lower values indicating more correlation). Finally, we extend our efficiency results to the case of reusable resources, where an agent might need to hold the item over multiple rounds to receive utility. Our results subsume previous guarantees obtained using a more complicated mechanism proving a half ideal utility guarantee under i.i.d. values sampled from worst-case distributions.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Giannis Fikioris, Siddhartha Banerjee, Éva Tardos. 2025-06-12. Beyond Worst-Case Online Allocation via Dynamic Max-min Fairness. https://doi.org/10.1145/3736252.3742501

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Learning in Structured Stackelberg Games

We initiate the study of structured Stackelberg games, a novel form of strategic interaction between a leader and a follower where contextual information can be predictive of the follower's (unknown) type. Motivated by applications such as security games and AI safety, we show how this additional structure can help the leader learn a utility-maximizing policy in both the online and distributional settings. In the online setting, we first prove that standard learning-theoretic measures of complexity do not characterize the difficulty of the leader's learning task. Notably, we find that there exists a learning-theoretic measure of complexity, analogous to the Littlestone dimension in online classification, that tightly characterizes the leader's instance-optimal regret. We term this the Stackelberg-Littlestone dimension, and leverage it to provide a provably optimal online learning algorithm. In the distributional setting, we provide analogous results by showing that two new dimensions control the sample complexity upper- and lower-bound.

cs.GT

Equilibrium and Infeasibility: A new solution concept for games

Addressing infeasibility in non-cooperative games has become an important topic, as many problems across different applications face this issue. In this paper, we propose a new solution concept for generalized games with possibly infeasible individual constraints. A solution is defined as the limit of a sequence of generalized Nash equilibria induced by games with penalty terms relaxing the individual constraints. Existence is established for a broad range of games and we provide conditions allowing to characterize a $ψ$-penalized solution as a strategy profile maximizing every player's utility over all her penalty minimizing strategies. A variation of Divide-the-Dollar serves as an illustrative example. We further establish the compatibility with the GNE and the solution to the Nash bargaining.

cs.GT

Subgame-Perfect Nash Equilibria of Plurality Voting with Abstention: a PSPACE-Completeness Result for Restricted Ballots

We consider sequential Plurality elections in which each voter may abstain or vote for a single candidate. Each voter assigns utilities to all candidates; for each voter, this induces a (weak) order over the candidates. Ties are resolved uniformly at random, and voting has a small positive cost, so that a voter prefers to abstain when their vote cannot change the election outcome. We consider a variant of this model where, for each voter, we additionally specify a prefix of her ranking, so that she is only allowed to vote for a candidate from that prefix (or abstain). We prove that for this variant of the model, deciding whether a designated candidate is among the election winners in a subgame-perfect equilibrium of the associated extensive-form game is PSPACE-complete. This partially resolves an open problem from the work of Desmedt and Elkind [2010].

cs.GT