Approximate Competitive Equilibrium from Equal Incomes (A-CEEI) is an equilibrium-based solution concept for fair division of discrete items to agents with combinatorial demands. In theory, it is known that in asymptotically large markets:

Scoring involves the compression of a number of quantitative attributes into a single meaningful value. We consider the problem of how to generate scores in a setting where they should be weakly monotone (either non-increasing or non-decreasing) in their dimensions. Our approach allows an expert to score an arbitrary set of points to produce meaningful, continuous, monotone scores over the entire domain, while exactly interpolating through those inputs. In contrast, existing monotone interpolating methods only work in two dimensions and typically require exhaustive grid input. Our technique significantly lowers the bar to score creation, allowing domain experts to develop mathematically coherent scores. The method is used in practice to create the LEED Performance scores that gauge building sustainability.

Competitive equilibrium with equal incomes (CEEI) is a well-known fair allocation mechanism [Foley67:Resource, Varian74: Equity, Thomson85:Theories]; however, for indivisible resources a CEEI may not exist. It was shown in Budish [2011] that in the case of indivisible resources there is always an allocation, called A-CEEI, that is approximately fair, approximately truthful, and approximately efficient, for some favorable approximation parameters. This approximation is used in practice to assign business school students to classes. In this paper we show that finding the A-CEEI allocation guaranteed to exist by Budish's theorem is PPAD-complete. We further show that finding an approximate equilibrium with better approximation guarantees is even harder: NP-complete.

Four desiderata for automated market makers have appeared in the literature: (1) bounded loss, (2) the ability to make a profit, (3) a vanishing bid/ask spread, and (4) unlimited market depth. Intriguingly, market makers that satisfy any three of these desiderata have appeared in the literature. However, it was an open question as to whether a market maker can simultaneously satisfy all four because the qualities are oppositional. In this paper, we design market makers that satisfy all four. We achieve this by introducing a new, practical framework. It extends constant-utility cost functions with two separate functions that are added to the prices quoted to the trader. The liquidity function uses its proceeds to increase the amount of liquidity provided by the market maker. The profit function represents a "lockbox" of savings that is separate from the rest of the market maker's decision-making process.

Using a model of agent behavior based around envy-reducing strategies, we describe an iterated combinatorial auction in which the allocation and prices converge to a solution in the core of the agents' true valuations. In each round of the iterative auction mechanism, agents act on envy quotes produced by the mechanism: hints that suggest the prices of the bundles they are interested in. We describe optimal methods of generating envy quotes for various core-selecting mechanisms. Prior work on core-selecting combinatorial auctions has required agents to have perfect information about every agent's valuations to achieve a solution in the core. In contrast, here a core solution is reached even in the private information setting.

We designed and built the Gates Hillman Prediction Market (GHPM) to predict the opening day of the Gates and Hillman Centers, the new computer science buildings at Carnegie Mellon University. The market ran for almost a year and attracted 169 active traders who placed almost 40,000 bets with an automated market maker. Ranging over 365 possible opening days, the market's event partition size is the largest ever elicited in any prediction market by an order of magnitude. A market of this size required new advances, including a novel span-based elicitation interface. The results of the GHPM are important for two reasons. First, we uncovered two flaws of current automated market makers: spikiness and liquidity-insensitivity, and we develop the mathematical underpinnings of these flaws. Second, the market provides a valuable corpus of identity-linked trades. We use this data set to explore whether the market reacted to or anticipated official communications, how self-reported trader confidence had little relation to actual performance, and how trade frequencies suggest a power law distribution. Most significantly, the data enabled us to evaluate two competing hypotheses about how markets aggregate information, the Marginal Trader Hypothesis and the Hayek Hypothesis; the data strongly support the former.

Current automated market makers over binary events suffer from two problems that make them impractical. First, they are unable to adapt to liquidity, so trades cause prices to move the same amount in both thick and thin markets. Second, under normal circumstances, the market maker runs at a deficit. In this paper, we construct a market maker that is both sensitive to liquidity and can run at a profit. Our market maker has bounded loss for any initial level of liquidity and, as the initial level of liquidity approaches zero, worst-case loss approaches zero. For any level of initial liquidity we can establish a boundary in market state space such that, if the market terminates within that boundary, the market maker books a profit regardless of the realized outcome. Furthermore, we provide guidance as to how our market maker can be implemented over very large event spaces through a novel cost-function-based sampling method