Fraud can pose a challenge in many resource allocation domains, including social service delivery and credit provision. For example, agents may misreport private information in order to gain benefits or access to credit. To mitigate this, a principal can design strategic audits to verify claims and penalize misreporting. In this paper, we introduce a general model of audit policy design as a principal-agent game with multiple agents, where the principal commits to an audit policy, and agents collectively choose an equilibrium that minimizes the principal’s utility. We examine both adaptive and non-adaptive settings, depending on whether the principal's policy can be responsive to the distribution of agent reports. Our work provides efficient algorithms for computing optimal audit policies in both settings and extends these results to a setting with limited audit budgets.

Forecast aggregation combines the predictions of multiple forecasters to improve accuracy. However, the lack of knowledge about forecasters' information structure hinders optimal aggregation. Given a family of information structures, robust forecast aggregation aims to find the aggregator with minimal worst-case regret compared to the omniscient aggregator. Previous approaches for robust forecast aggregation rely on heuristic observations and parameter tuning. We propose an algorithmic framework for robust forecast aggregation. Our framework provides efficient approximation schemes for general information aggregation with a finite family of possible information structures. In the setting considered by Arieli et al. [2018] where two agents receive independent signals conditioned on a binary state, our framework also provides efficient approximation schemes by imposing Lipschitz conditions on the aggregator or discrete conditions on agents' reports. Numerical experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our method by providing a nearly optimal aggregator in the setting considered by Arieli et al. [2018].

Designing automated market makers (AMMs) for prediction markets on combinatorial securities over large outcome spaces poses significant computational challenges. Prior research has studied combinatorial prediction markets on specific set systems (e.g., intervals, permutations), characterizing and addressing the design challenges by exploiting their respective security or outcome structures. A comprehensive framework of AMMs design for prediction markets on arbitrary set systems remains yet elusive. In this paper, through establishing a novel connection between the design of AMMs for combinatorial prediction markets and the range query problem in computational geometry, we present a unified framework for both analyzing the computational complexity and designing efficient AMMs for combinatorial prediction markets.

Comparison data elicited from people are fundamental to many machine learning tasks, including reinforcement learning from human feedback for large language models and estimating ranking models. They are typically subjective and not directly verifiable. How to truthfully elicit such comparison data from rational individuals? We design peer prediction mechanisms for eliciting comparison data using a bonus-penalty payment. Our design leverages on the strong stochastic transitivity for comparison data to create symmetrically strongly truthful mechanisms such that truth-telling 1) forms a strict Bayesian Nash equilibrium, and 2) yields the highest payment among all symmetric equilibria. Each individual only needs to evaluate one pair of items and report her comparison in our mechanism. We further extend the bonus-penalty payment concept to eliciting networked data, designing a symmetrically strongly truthful mechanism when agents’ private signals are sampled according to the Ising models. We provide the necessary and sufficient conditions for our bonus-penalty payment to have truth-telling as a strict Bayesian Nash equilibrium. Experiments on two real-world datasets further support our theoretical discoveries.

We propose new differential privacy solutions for when external invariants and integer constraints are simultaneously enforced on the data product. These requirements arise in real world applications of private data curation, including the public release of the 2020 U.S. Decennial Census. They pose a great challenge to the production of provably private data products with adequate statistical usability. We propose integer subspace differential privacy to rigorously articulate the privacy guarantee when data products maintain both the invariants and integer characteristics, and demonstrate the composition and post-processing properties of our proposal. To address the challenge of sampling from a potentially highly restricted discrete space, we devise a pair of unbiased additive mechanisms, the generalized Laplace and the generalized Gaussian mechanisms, by solving the Diophantine equations as defined by the constraints. The proposed mechanisms have good accuracy, with errors exhibiting sub-exponential and sub-Gaussian tail probabilities respectively. To implement our proposal, we design an MCMC algorithm and supply empirical convergence assessment using estimated upper bounds on the total variation distance via L-lag coupling. We demonstrate the efficacy of our proposal with applications to a synthetic problem with intersecting invariants, a sensitive contingency table with known margins, and the 2010 Census county-level demonstration data with mandated fixed state population totals.

The recent framework of performative prediction [Perdomo et al. 2020] is aimed at capturing settings where predictions influence the outcome they want to predict. In this paper, we introduce a natural multi-agent version of this framework, where multiple decision makers try to predict the same outcome. We showcase that such competition can result in interesting phenomena by proving the possibility of phase transitions from stability to instability and eventually chaos. Specifically, we present settings of multi-agent performative prediction where under sufficient conditions their dynamics lead to global stability and optimality. In the opposite direction, when the agents are not sufficiently cautious in their learning/updates rates, we show that instability and in fact formal chaos is possible. We complement our theoretical predictions with simulations showcasing the predictive power of our results.

Many data applications have certain invariant constraints due to practical needs. Data curators who employ differential privacy need to respect such constraints on the sanitized data product as a primary utility requirement. Invariants challenge the formulation, implementation, and interpretation of privacy guarantees. We propose subspace differential privacy, to honestly characterize the dependence of the sanitized output on confidential aspects of the data. We discuss two design frameworks that convert well-known differentially private mechanisms, such as the Gaussian and the Laplace mechanisms, to subspace differentially private ones that respect the invariants specified by the curator. For linear queries, we discuss the design of near-optimal mechanisms that minimize the mean squared error. Subspace differentially private mechanisms rid the need for post-processing due to invariants, preserve transparency and statistical intelligibility of the output, and can be suitable for distributed implementation. We showcase the proposed mechanisms on the 2020 Census Disclosure Avoidance demonstration data, and a spatio-temporal dataset of mobile access point connections on a large university campus.

Peer prediction refers to a collection of mechanisms for eliciting information from human agents when direct verification of the obtained information is unavailable. They are designed to have a game-theoretic equilibrium where everyone reveals their private information truthfully. This result holds under the assumption that agents are Bayesian and they each adopt a fixed strategy across all tasks. Human agents however are observed in many domains to exhibit learning behavior in sequential settings. In this paper, we explore the dynamics of sequential peer prediction mechanisms when participants are learning agents. We first show that the notion of no regret alone for the agents’ learning algorithms cannot guarantee convergence to the truthful strategy. We then focus on a family of learning algorithms where strategy updates only depend on agents’ cumulative rewards and prove that agents' strategies in the popular Correlated Agreement (CA) mechanism converge to truthful reporting when they use algorithms from this family. This family of algorithms is not necessarily no-regret, but includes several familiar no-regret learning algorithms (e.g multiplicative weight update and Follow the Perturbed Leader) as special cases. Simulation of several algorithms in this family as well as the $\epsilon$-greedy algorithm, which is outside of this family, shows convergence to the truthful strategy in the CA mechanism.

We undertake a system-level analysis of the conference peer review process. The process involves three constituencies with different objectives: authors want their papers accepted at prestigious venues (and quickly), conferences want to present a program with many high-quality and few low-quality papers, and reviewers want to avoid being overburdened by reviews. These objectives are far from aligned; the key obstacle is that the evaluation of the merits of a submission (both by the authors and the reviewers) is inherently noisy. Over the years, conferences have experimented with numerous policies and innovations to navigate the tradeoffs. These experiments include setting various bars for acceptance, varying the number of reviews per submission, requiring prior reviews to be included with resubmissions, and others. The purpose of the present work is to investigate, both analytically and using agent-based simulations, how well various policies work, and more importantly, why they do or do not work.

In the influence maximization problem, one chooses a fixed number of initial seeds in a social network to maximize the spread of their influence. We study this problem with the r-complex contagion model, where each uninfected vertex in the network becomes infected if it has at least r infected neighbors. We focus on a random graph model called the stochastic hierarchical blockmodel. When the graph is not exceptionally sparse, under certain mild assumptions, we prove the optimal seeding strategy puts all the seeds in a single community. This matches the intuition that, in a nonsubmodular cascade model, placing seeds near each other creates synergy. However, it sharply contrasts with the intuition for submodular cascade models (e.g., the independent cascade model) in which nearby seeds tend to erode each others' effects. We use this observation to design a polynomial-time dynamic programming algorithm for a slightly more general setting.

When can cooperation arise from self-interested decisions in public goods games? And how can we help agents to act cooperatively? We examine these classical questions in a pivotal participation game, a variant of public good games, where heterogeneous agents make binary participation decisions on contributing their endowments, and the public project succeeds when it has enough contributions. We prove it is NP-complete to decide the existence of a cooperative Nash equilibrium such that the project succeeds. We demonstrate that the decision problem becomes easy if agents are homogeneous enough. We then propose two algorithms to help cooperation in the game. Our first algorithm adds an external investment to the public project, and our second algorithm uses matching funds. We show the cost to induce a cooperative Nash equilibrium is near-optimal for both algorithms. Finally, the cost of matching funds can always be smaller than the cost of adding an external investment. Intuitively, matching funds provide a greater incentive for cooperation than adding an external investment does.

Peer prediction mechanisms incentivize agents to truthfully report their signals even in the absence of verification by comparing agents' reports with those of their peers. In the detail-free multi-task setting, agents are asked to respond to multiple independent and identically distributed tasks, and the mechanism does not know the prior distribution of agents' signals. The goal is to provide an ε-strongly truthful mechanism where truth-telling rewards agents "strictly" more than any other strategy profile (with ε additive error) even for heterogeneous agents, and to do so while requiring as few tasks as possible. We design a family of mechanisms with a scoring function that maps a pair of reports to a score. The mechanism is strongly truthful if the scoring function is "prior ideal". Moreover, the mechanism is ε-strongly truthful as long as the scoring function used is sufficiently close to the ideal scoring function. This reduces the above mechanism design problem to a learning problem - specifically learning an ideal scoring function. Because learning the prior distribution is sufficient (but not necessary) to learn the scoring function, we can apply standard learning theory techniques that leverage side information about the prior (e.g., that it is close to some parametric model). Furthermore, we derive a variational representation of an ideal scoring function and reduce the learning problem into an empirical risk minimization. We leverage this reduction to obtain very general results for peer prediction in the multi-task setting. Specifically, - Sample Complexity: We show how to derive good bounds on the number of tasks required for different types of priors-in some cases exponentially improving previous results. In particular, we can upper bound the required number of tasks for parametric models with bounded learning complexity. Furthermore, our reduction applies to myriad continuous signal space settings. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first peer-prediction mechanism on continuous signals designed for the multi-task setting. - Connection to Machine Learning: We show how to turn a soft-predictor of an agent’s signals (given the other agents' signals) into a mechanism. This allows the practical use of machine learning algorithms that give good results even when many agents provide noisy information. - Stronger Properties: In the finite setting, we obtain ε-strongly truthful mechanisms for any stochastically relevant prior. Prior works either only apply to more restrictive settings, or achieve a weaker notion of truthfulness (informed truthfulness).

Recent advances in multi-task peer prediction have greatly expanded our knowledge about the power of multi-task peer prediction mechanisms. Various mechanisms have been proposed in different settings to elicit different types of information. But we still lack understanding about when desirable mechanisms will exist for a multi-task peer prediction problem. In this work, we study the elicitability of multi-task peer prediction problems. We consider a designer who has certain knowledge about the underlying information structure and wants to elicit certain information from a group of participants. Our goal is to infer the possibility of having a desirable mechanism based on the primitives of the problem. Our contribution is twofold. First, we provide a characterization of the elicitable multi-task peer prediction problems, assuming that the designer only uses scoring mechanisms. Scoring mechanisms are the mechanisms that reward participants' reports for different tasks separately. The characterization uses a geometric approach based on the power diagram characterization in the single-task setting. For general mechanisms, we also give a necessary condition for a multi-task problem to be elicitable. Second, we consider the case when the designer aims to elicit some properties that are linear in the participant's posterior about the state of the world. We first show that in some cases, the designer basically can only elicit the posterior itself. We then look into the case when the designer aims to elicit the participants' posteriors. We give a necessary condition for the posterior to be elicitable. This condition implies that the mechanisms proposed by Kong and Schoenebeck are already the best we can hope for in their setting, in the sense that their mechanisms can solve any problem instance that can possibly be elicitable.

We initiate the study of information elicitation mechanisms for a crowd containing both self-interested agents, who respond to incentives, and adversarial agents, who may collude to disrupt the system. Our mechanisms work in the peer prediction setting where ground truth need not be accessible to the mechanism or even exist.

We study learning statistical properties from strategic agents with private information. In this problem, agents must be incentivized to truthfully reveal their information even when it cannot be directly verified. Moreover, the information reported by the agents must be aggregated into a statistical estimate. We study two fundamental statistical properties: estimating the mean of an unknown Gaussian, and linear regression with Gaussian error. The information of each agent is one point in a Euclidean space.Our main results are two mechanisms for each of these problems which optimally aggregate the information of agents in the truth-telling equilibrium:• A minimal (non-revelation) mechanism for large populations — agents only need to report one value, but that value need not be their point.• A mechanism for small populations that is non-minimal — agents need to answer more than one question.These mechanisms are “informed truthful” mechanisms where reporting unaltered data (truth-telling) 1) forms a strict Bayesian Nash equilibrium and 2) has strictly higher welfare than any oblivious equilibrium where agents' strategies are independent of their private signals. We also show a minimal revelation mechanism (each agent only reports her signal) for a restricted setting and use an impossibility result to prove the necessity of this restriction.We build upon the peer prediction literature in the single-question setting; however, most previous work in this area focuses on discrete signals, whereas our setting is inherently continuous, and we further simplify the agents' reports.

We study a large family of stochastic processes that update a limited amount in each step. One family of such examples is agent-based modeling, where one agent at a time updates, so the state has small changes in each step. A key question is how this family of stochastic processes is approximated by their mean-field approximations. Prior work shows that the stochastic processes escape repelling fixed points and saddle points in polynomial time.

Interacting Particle Systems—exemplified by the voter model, iterative majority, and iterative k—majority processes—have found use in many disciplines including distributed systems, statistical physics, social networks, and Markov chain theory. In these processes, nodes update their “opinion” according to the frequency of opinions amongst their neighbors. We propose a family of models parameterized by an update function that we call Node Dynamics: every node initially has a binary opinion. At each round a node is uniformly chosen and randomly updates its opinion with the probability distribution specified by the value of the update function applied to the frequencies of its neighbors’ opinions. In this work, we prove that the Node Dynamics converge to consensus in time Θ(n log n) in complete graphs and dense Erdös-Rényi random graphs when the update function is from a large family of “majority-like” functions. Our technical contribution is a general framework that upper bounds the consensus time. In contrast to previous work that relies on handcrafted potential functions, our framework systematically constructs a potential function based on the state space structure.

Being popular in language evolution, cognitive science, and culture dynamics, the Naming Game has been widely used to analyze how agents reach global consensus via communications in multi-agent systems. Most prior work considered networks that are symmetric and homogeneous (e.g., vertex transitive). In this paper we consider asymmetric or heterogeneous settings that complement the current literature: 1) we show that increasing asymmetry in network topology can improve convergence rates. The star graph empirically converges faster than all previously studied graphs; 2) we consider graph topologies that are particularly challenging for naming game such as disjoint cliques or multi-level trees and ask how much extra homogeneity (random edges) is required to allow convergence or fast convergence. We provided theoretical analysis which was confirmed by simulations; 3) we analyze how consensus can be manipulated when stubborn nodes are introduced at different points of the process. Early introduction of stubborn nodes can easily influence the outcome in certain family of networks while late introduction of stubborn nodes has much less power.

Social behaviors and choices spread through interactions and may lead to a cascading behavior. Understanding how such social cascades spread in a network is crucial for many applications ranging from viral marketing to political campaigns. The behavior of cascade depends crucially on the model of cascade or social influence and the topological structure of the social network.

Sybil attacks, in which an adversary creates a large number of identities, present a formidable problem for the robustness of recommendation systems. One promising method of sybil detection is to use data from social network ties to implicitly infer trust.