We study competition among contests in a general model that allows for an arbitrary and heterogeneous space of contest design and symmetric contestants. The goal of the contest designers is to maximize the contestants' sum of efforts. Our main result shows that optimal contests in the monopolistic setting (i.e., those that maximize the sum of efforts in a model with a single contest) form an equilibrium in the model with competition among contests. Under a very natural assumption these contests are in fact dominant, and the equilibria that they form are unique. Moreover, equilibria with the optimal contests are Pareto-optimal even in cases where other equilibria emerge. In many natural cases, they also maximize the social welfare.

Weighted voting games are applicable to a wide variety of multi-agent settings. They enable the formalization of power indices which quantify the coalitional power of players. We take a novel approach to the study of the power of big vs.~small players in these games. We model small (big) players as having single (multiple) votes. The aggregate relative power of big players is measured w.r.t.~their votes proportion. For this ratio, we show small constant worst-case bounds for the Shapley-Shubik and the Deegan-Packel indices. In sharp contrast, this ratio is unbounded for the Banzhaf index. As an application, we define a false-name strategic normal form game where each big player may split its votes between false identities, and study its various properties. Together our results provide foundations for the implications of players' size, modeled as their ability to split, on their relative power.

We study contract design for welfare maximization in the well-known "common agency" model of Bernheim and Whinston [1986]. This model combines the challenges of coordinating multiple principals with the fundamental challenge of contract design: that principals have incomplete information of the agent's choice of action. Motivated by the significant social inefficiency of standard contracts for such settings (which we formally quantify using a price of anarchy/stability analysis), we investigate whether and how a recent toolbox developed for the first set of challenges under a complete-information assumption - VCG contracts [Lavi and Shamash, 2019] - can be extended to incomplete information.

Weighted voting games apply to a wide variety of multi-agent settings. They enable the formalization of power indices which quantify the coalitional power of players. We take a novel approach to the study of the power of big vs. small players in these games. We model small (big) players as having single (multiple) votes. The aggregate relative power of big players is measured w.r.t. their votes proportion. For this ratio, we show small constant worst-case bounds for the Shapley-Shubik and the Deegan-Packel indices. In sharp contrast, this ratio is unbounded for the Banzhaf index. As an application, we define a false-name strategic normal form game where each big player may split its votes between false identities, and study its various properties. Together, our results provide foundations for the implications of players’ size, modeled as their ability to split, on their relative power.

VCG is a classical combinatorial auction that maximizes social welfare. However, while the standard single-item Vickrey auction is false-name-proof, a major failure of multi-item VCG is its vulnerability to false-name attacks. This occurs already in the natural bare minimum model in which there are two identical items and bidders are single-minded. Previous solutions to this challenge focused on developing alternative mechanisms that compromise social welfare. We re-visit the VCG auction vulnerability and consider the bidder behavior in Bayesian settings. In service of that we introduce a novel notion, termed the granularity threshold, that characterizes VCG Bayesian resilience to false-name attacks as a function of the bidder type distribution. Using this notion we show a large class of cases in which VCG indeed obtains Bayesian resilience for the two-item single-minded setting.

We study a competition among two contests, where each contest designer aims to attract as much effort as possible. Such a competition exists in reality, e.g., in crowd-sourcing websites. Our results are phrased in terms of the ``relative prize power'' of a contest, which is the ratio of the total prize offered by this contest designer relative to the sum of total prizes of the two contests. When contestants have a quasi-linear utility function that captures both a risk-aversion effect and a cost of effort, we show that a simple contest attracts a total effort which approaches the relative prize power of the contest designer assuming a large number of contestants. This holds regardless of the contest policy of the opponent, hence providing a ``safety level'' which is a robust notion similar in spirit to the max-min solution concept.

The Empirical Revenue Maximization (ERM) is one of the most important price learning algorithms in auction design: as the literature shows it can learn approximately optimal reserve prices for revenue-maximizing auctioneers in both repeated auctions and uniform-price auctions. However, in these applications the agents who provide inputs to ERM have incentives to manipulate the inputs to lower the outputted price. We generalize the definition of an incentive-awareness measure proposed by Lavi et al (2019), to quantify the reduction of ERM's outputted price due to a change of m>=1 out of N input samples, and provide specific convergence rates of this measure to zero as N goes to infinity for different types of input distributions. By adopting this measure, we construct an efficient, approximately incentive-compatible, and revenue-optimal learning algorithm using ERM in repeated auctions against non-myopic bidders, and show approximate group incentive-compatibility in uniform-price auctions.

In this paper, a rather general online problem called \emph{dynamic resource allocation with capacity constraints (DRACC)} is introduced and studied in the realm of posted price mechanisms. This problem subsumes several applications of stateful pricing, including but not limited to posted prices for online job scheduling and matching over a dynamic bipartite graph. As the existing online learning techniques do not yield vanishing-regret mechanisms for this problem, we develop a novel online learning framework defined over deterministic Markov decision processes with \emph{dynamic} state transition and reward functions. We then prove that if the Markov decision process is guaranteed to admit an oracle that can simulate any given policy from any initial state with bounded loss --- a condition that is satisfied in the DRACC problem --- then the online learning problem can be solved with vanishing regret. Our proof technique is based on a reduction to online learning with \emph{switching cost}, in which an online decision maker incurs an extra cost every time she switches from one arm to another. We formally demonstrate this connection and further show how DRACC can be used in our proposed applications of stateful pricing.

In a generalized network design (GND) problem, a set of resources are assigned (non-exclusively) to multiple requests . Each request contributes its weight to the resources it uses and the total load on a resource is then translated to the cost it incurs via a resource-specific cost function. Motivated by energy efficiency applications, recently, there is a growing interest in GND using cost functions that exhibit (dis)economies of scale ((D)oS) , namely, cost functions that appear subadditive for small loads and superadditive for larger loads. The current article advances the existing literature on approximation algorithms for GND problems with (D)oS cost functions in various aspects: (1) while the existing results are restricted to routing requests in undirected graphs, identifying the resources with the graph’s edges, the current article presents a generic approximation framework that yields approximation results for a much wider family of requests (including various types of Steiner tree and Steiner forest requests) in both directed and undirected graphs, where the resources can be identified with either the edges or the vertices; (2) while the existing results assume that a request contributes the same weight to each resource it uses, our approximation framework allows for unrelated weights, thus providing the first non-trivial approximation for the problem of scheduling unrelated parallel machines with (D)oS cost functions; (3) while most of the existing approximation algorithms are based on convex programming, our approximation framework is fully combinatorial and runs in strongly polynomial time; (4) the family of (D)oS cost functions considered in the current article is more general than the one considered in the existing literature, providing a more accurate abstraction for practical energy conservation scenarios; and (5) we obtain the first approximation ratio for GND with (D)oS cost functions that depends only on the parameters of the resources’ technology and does not grow with the number of resources, the number of requests, or their weights. The design of our approximation framework relies heavily on Roughgarden’s smoothness toolbox [43], thus demonstrating the possible usefulness of this toolbox in the area of approximation algorithms.

We study network coordination problems, as captured by the setting of generalized network design (Emek et al., STOC 2018), in the face of uncertainty resulting from partial information that the network users hold regarding the actions of their peers. This uncertainty is formalized using Alon et al.'s Bayesian ignorance framework (TCS 2012). While the approach of Alon et al. is purely combinatorial, the current paper takes into account computational considerations: Our main technical contribution is the development of (strongly) polynomial time algorithms for local decision making in the face of Bayesian uncertainty.

Addressing a fundamental problem in programmable matter, we present the first deterministic algorithm to elect a unique leader in a system of connected amoebots assuming only that amoebots are initially contracted. Previous algorithms either used randomization, made various assumptions (shapes with no holes, or known shared chirality), or elected several co-leaders in some cases. Some of the building blocks we introduce in constructing the algorithm are of interest by themselves, especially the procedure we present for reaching common chirality among the amoebots. Given the leader election and the chirality agreement building block, it is known that various tasks in programmable matter can be performed or improved. The main idea of the new algorithm is the usage of the ability of the amoebots to move, which previous leader election algorithms have not used.

The Bitcoin payment system involves two agent types: Users that transact with the currency and pay fees and miners in charge of authorizing transactions and securing the system in return for these fees. Two of Bitcoin's challenges are (i) securing sufficient miner revenues as block rewards decrease, and (ii) alleviating the throughput limitation due to a small maximal block size cap. These issues are strongly related as increasing the maximal block size may decrease revenue due to Bitcoin's pay-your-bid approach. To decouple them, we analyze the “monopolistic auction” [8], showing: (i) its revenue does not decrease as the maximal block size increases, (ii) it is resilient to an untrusted auctioneer (the miner), and (iii) simplicity for transaction issuers (bidders), as the average gain from strategic bid shading (relative to bidding one's true maximal willingness to pay) diminishes as the number of bids increases.

We study the intersection signalling control problem for cars with heterogeneous valuations of time (VoT). We are interested in a control algorithm that has some desirable properties: (1) it induces cars to report their VoT truthfully, (2) it minimizes the value of time lost for cars waiting at the intersection, and (3) it is computationally efficient. We obtain three main results: (1) We describe a computationally efficient heuristic forward search approach to solve the static problem. Simulation results show that this method is significantly faster than the dynamic-programming approach to solve the static problem (which is by itself polynomial time). We therefore believe that our algorithm can be commercially implemented. (2) We extend the solution of the static problem to the dynamic case. We couple our algorithm with a carefully designed payment scheme which yields an incentive compatible mechanism. In other words, it is the best interest of each car to truthfully report its VoT. (3) We describe simulation results that compare the social welfare obtained by our scheduling algorithm, as measured by the total value of waiting time, to the social welfare obtained by other intersection signalling control methods.

In a generalized network design (GND) problem, a set of resources are assigned (non-exclusively) to multiple requests. Each request contributes its weight to the resources it uses and the total load on a resource is then translated to the cost it incurs via a resource specific cost function. Motivated by energy efficiency applications, recently, there is a growing interest in GND using cost functions that exhibit (dis)economies of scale ((D)oS), namely, cost functions that appear subadditive for small loads and superadditive for larger loads.

We analyze ways by which people decompose into groups in distributed systems. We are interested in systems in which an agent can increase its utility by connecting to other agents, but must also pay a cost that increases with the size of the system. The right balance is achieved by the right size group of agents. We formulate and analyze three intuitive and realistic games and show how simple changes in the protocol can drastically improve the price of anarchy of these games. In particular, we identify two important properties for a low price of anarchy: agreement in joining the system, and the possibility of appealing a rejection from a system. We show that the latter property is especially important if there are some pre-existing constraints regarding who may collaborate (or communicate) with whom.

Motivated by the market for display advertisement over the Internet, we study competition between firms with a fixed supply whose size cannot be changed, and analyze the resulting revenue. We are most interested in studying the asymmetric case in which one large seller dominates the market and competes against a small new entrant seller. We present a model in which sellers announce selling policies, and given these policies buyers distribute their budget in a strategic fashion among sellers so as to maximize the portion of the supply that they receive. As a function of the policies of the sellers, we analyze revenue of sellers in pure and mixed Nash equilibria for the buyers. Our results show a contrast between the near-symmetric case (sellers with similar supply sizes) and the extremely asymmetric case (a very large seller vs. a very small seller). In particular, in the near-symmetric case, simple policies can ensure each seller a revenue almost proportional to her market share. In contrast, in the asymmetric case the large seller has a selling policy that yields disproportionally low revenue for the small seller. Interestingly, in our abstract model, non-monotone selling policies (namely, sometimes giving more of the supply to a buyer who decreases his bid) can offer advantages to the large seller that are (provably) impossible to achieve via monotone selling policies.

We study sequential voting with two alternatives, in a setting with utility externalities: as usual, each voter has a private preference over the candidates and likes her favorite candidate to win, but additionally, a voter values voting for the chosen winner (which is determined by the majority or super-majority of votes). This model aims to capture voting behavior ("likes") in social networks which are publicly observed and sequential, and in which people care about their "public image" as determined by their votes and the socially accepted outcome (the chosen winner). Unlike in voting with no externalities, voters act strategically although there are only two alternatives, as they rather vote against their preferred candidate if the other is to win. We present two rather surprising results that are derived from the strategic behavior of the voters. First, we show that in sequential voting in which a winner is declared when the gap in votes is at least some large value $M$, increasing $M$ does not result in the aggregation of preferences of more voters in the decision, as voters start a herd on one candidate once a small lead in votes for that candidate develops. Furthermore, the threshold lead for such a herd to start is independent of M. Secondly, we show that there are cases in which sequential voting is strictly better than simultaneous voting, in the sense that it chooses the most preferred alternative with higher probability.

We study a setting of online auctions with expiring/perishable items: $K$ items are sold sequentially, buyers arrive over time and have unit-demand. The goal is to maximize the social welfare (sum of winners' values). Most previously suggested mechanisms for this model are direct-revelation. In contrast, in real-life we usually see open mechanisms, most often a sequence of English auctions. We ask whether the previous optimal approximation bounds can be achieved using the more popular/realistic mechanism, or a small variant of it. We observe that a sequence of English auctions (the exact original format) does not guarantee any constant approximation, and describe two variants that bring back the approximation guarantee.

A Walrasian equilibrium in an economy with non-identical indivisible items exists only for small classes of players' valuations (mostly "gross substitutes" valuations), and may not generally exist even with decreasing marginal values. This paper studies a relaxed notion, "conditional equilibrium", that requires individual rationality and "outward stability", i.e., a player will not want to add items to her allocation, at given prices. While a Walrasian equilibrium outcome is unconditionally stable, a conditional equilibrium outcome is stable if players cannot choose to drop only some of their allocated items.

We give a general technique to obtain approximation mechanisms that are truthful in expectation. We show that for packing domains, any α -approximation algorithm that also bounds the integrality gap of the LP relaxation of the problem by α can be used to construct an α -approximation mechanism that is truthful in expectation. This immediately yields a variety of new and significantly improved results for various problem domains and furthermore, yields truthful (in expectation) mechanisms with guarantees that match the best-known approximation guarantees when truthfulness is not required. In particular, we obtain the first truthful mechanisms with approximation guarantees for a variety of multiparameter domains. We obtain truthful (in expectation) mechanisms achieving approximation guarantees of O (√ m ) for combinatorial auctions (CAs), (1 + ϵ ) for multiunit CAs with B = Ω (log m ) copies of each item, and 2 for multiparameter knapsack problems (multi-unit auctions). Our construction is based on considering an LP relaxation of the problem and using the classic VCG mechanism to obtain a truthful mechanism in this fractional domain. We argue that the (fractional) optimal solution scaled down by α , where α is the integrality gap of the problem, can be represented as a convex combination of integer solutions, and by viewing this convex combination as specifying a probability distribution over integer solutions, we get a randomized, truthful in expectation mechanism. Our construction can be seen as a way of exploiting VCG in a computational tractable way even when the underlying social-welfare maximization problem is NP -hard.

We consider the problem of designing truthful mechanisms to minimize the makespan on m unrelated machines. In their seminal paper, Nisan and Ronen [14] showed a lower bound of 2, and an upper bound of m, thus leaving a large gap. They conjectured that their upper bound is tight, but were unable to prove it. Despite many attempts that yield positive results for several special cases, the conjecture is far from being solved: the lower bound was only recently slightly increased to 2.61 [5,10], while the best upper bound remained unchanged.

In this article, we are interested in general techniques for designing mechanisms that approximate the social welfare in the presence of selfish rational behavior. We demonstrate our results in the setting of Combinatorial Auctions (CA). Our first result is a general deterministic technique to decouple the algorithmic allocation problem from the strategic aspects, by a procedure that converts any algorithm to a dominant-strategy ascending mechanism . This technique works for any single value domain, in which each agent has the same value for each desired outcome, and this value is the only private information. In particular, for “single-value CAs”, where each player desires any one of several different bundles but has the same value for each of them, our technique converts any approximation algorithm to a dominant strategy mechanism that almost preserves the original approximation ratio. Our second result provides the first computationally efficient deterministic mechanism for the case of single-value multi-minded bidders (with private value and private desired bundles). The mechanism achieves an approximation to the social welfare which is close to the best possible in polynomial time (unless P=NP). This mechanism is an algorithmic implementation in undominated strategies , a notion that we define and justify, and is of independent interest.

We study multi-unit auctions where the bidders have a budget constraint, a situation very common in practice that has received very little attention in the auction theory literature. Our main result is an impossibility: there are no incentive-compatible auctions that always produce a Pareto-optimal allocation. We also obtain some surprising positive results for certain special cases.

We consider the problem of makespan minimization on m unrelated machines in the context of algorithmic mechanism design, where the machines are the strategic players. This is a multidimensional scheduling domain, and the only known positive results for makespan minimization in such a domain are O(m)-approximation truthful mechanisms [22, 20]. We study a well-motivated special case of this problem, where the processing time of a job on each machine may either be "low" or "high", and the low and high values are public and job-dependent. This preserves the multidimensionality of the domain, and generalizes the restricted-machines (i.e., {pj,∞}) setting in scheduling. We give a general technique to convert any c-approximation algorithm to a 3c-approximation truthful-in-expectation mechanism. This is one of the few known results that shows how to export approximation algorithms for a multidimensional problem into truthful mechanisms in a black-box fashion. When the low and high values are the same for all jobs, we devise a deterministic 2-approximation truthful mechanism. These are the first truthful mechanisms with non-trivial performance guarantees for a multidimensional scheduling domain.

We give a general technique to obtain approximation mechanisms that are truthful in expectation. We show that for packing domains, any /spl alpha/-approximation algorithm that also bounds the integrality gap of the IF relaxation of the problem by a can be used to construct an /spl alpha/-approximation mechanism that is truthful in expectation. This immediately yields a variety of new and significantly improved results for various problem domains and furthermore, yields truthful (in expectation) mechanisms with guarantees that match the best known approximation guarantees when truthfulness is not required. In particular, we obtain the first truthful mechanisms with approximation guarantees for a variety of multi-parameter domains. We obtain truthful (in expectation) mechanisms achieving approximation guarantees of O(/spl radic/m) for combinatorial auctions (CAs), (1 + /spl epsi/ ) for multiunit CAs with B = /spl Omega/(log m) copies of each item, and 2 for multiparameter knapsack problems (multiunit auctions). Our construction is based on considering an LP relaxation of the problem and using the classic VCG mechanism by W. Vickrey (1961), E. Clarke (1971) and T. Groves (1973) to obtain a truthful mechanism in this fractional domain. We argue that the (fractional) optimal solution scaled down by a, where a is the integrality gap of the problem, can be represented as a convex combination of integer solutions, and by viewing this convex combination as specifying a probability distribution over integer solutions, we get a randomized, truthful in expectation mechanism. Our construction can be seen as a way of exploiting VCG in a computational tractable way even when the underlying social-welfare maximization problem is NP-hard.

This paper analyzes incentive compatible (truthful) mechanisms over restricted domains of preferences, the leading example being combinatorial auctions. Our work generalizes the characterization of Roberts (1979) who showed that truthful mechanisms over unrestricted domains with at least 3 possible outcomes must be "affine maximizers". We show that truthful mechanisms for combinatorial auctions (and related restricted domains) must be "almost affine maximizers" if they also satisfy an additional requirement of "independence of irrelevant alternatives". This requirement is without loss of generality for unrestricted domains as well as for auctions between two players where all goods must be allocated. This implies unconditional results for these cases, including a new proof of Roberts' theorem. The computational implications of this characterization are severe, as reasonable "almost affine maximizers" are shown to be as computationally hard as exact optimization. This implies the near-helplessness of such truthful polynomial-time auctions in all cases where exact optimization is computationally intractable.

Most implementations of a computing cluster (CC) use greedy-based heuristics to perform load balancing. In some cases, this is in contrast to theoretical results about the performance of online load balancing algorithms. We define the home model in order to better reflect the architecture of a CC. In this new theoretical model, we assume a realistic cluster structure in which every job has a "home" machine which it prefers to be executed on, e.g. due to I/O considerations or because it was created there. We develop several online algorithms for load balancing in this model. We first provide a theoretical worst-case analysis, showing that our algorithms achieve better competitive ratios and perform less reassignments than algorithms for the unrelated machines model, which is the best existing theoretical model to describe such clusters. We then present an empirical average-case performance analysis by means of simulations. We show that the performance of our algorithms is consistently better than that of several existing load balancing methods, e.g. the greedy and the opportunity cost methods, especially in a dynamic and changing CC environment.

This paper studies auctions in a setting where the dierent bidders arrive at dierent times and the auction mechanism is required to make decisions about each bid as it is received.Such settings occur in computerized auctions of computational resources as well as in other settings.We call such auctions, on-line auctions.We r s t c haracterize exactly on-line auctions that are incentive compatible, i.e.where rational bidders are always motivated to bid their true valuation.We then embark on a competitive worst-case analysis of incentive compatible on-line auctions.We obtain several results, the cleanest of which is an incentive compatible on-line auction for a large number of identical items.This auction has an optimal competitive ratio, both in terms of seller's revenue and in terms of the total social eÆciency obtained.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.To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific